Difference old/new aca500plus

Caution: Non registered users only see threads and messages in the currently selected language, which is determined by their browser. Please create an account and log in to see all content by default. This is a limitation of the forum software.


Please understand that you need to create an account to be able to post, guest posting was disabled as an anti spam measure.

  • Hi,


    I am a happy owner of the fantastic aca500plus (old version with small display).


    I have a friend who owns an aca500plus (new version with big display).


    We both also own a314 expansion cards (which go into the trap door).

    We have noted a curious difference - the two cards can peacefully coexist when using the new aca500plus. But when using the old aca500plus, the a314 is not detected. We have compared our settings in aca500plus and a314, and it seems the only difference is the version of the aca500plus.

    I will probably upgrade to a new aca500plus when I get the chance, but it would be interesting to hear if anyone has any ideas of what the differences are between the new and old version that could perhaps be a clueto why this happens.


    Best regards Per

  • This is hard to believe, as there is no difference in the logic of the cards. So could it be that you have different Agnus versions and one allows you to use ChipMap, the other doesn't, and that's why that shared memory isn't found?


    Note that when ChipMap is on, the trapdoor memory space is mapped to $08.0000, and the trapdoor area $c0.0000 is still filled with memory, but that is located on the accelerator. My guess is that the software for that co-processor sees trapdoor memory and assumes that it needs to look for it's hardware there.


    Jens

  • Thank you for the feedback - I'll try to compare the Agnus versions next time I get the chance! I should try swapping our acas between our Amigas, perhaps that would give a clue.

  • The last reply was more than 365 days ago, this thread is most likely obsolete. It is recommended to create a new thread instead.