Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!rochester!ritcv!cci632!ccird1!rb From: rb@ccird1.UUCP (Rex Ballard) Newsgroups: net.micro.atari16 Subject: Re: 1040 ST vs. 520 ST w/upgrade Message-ID: <398@ccird1.UUCP> Date: Mon, 5-May-86 14:02:26 EDT Article-I.D.: ccird1.398 Posted: Mon May 5 14:02:26 1986 Date-Received: Thu, 8-May-86 06:46:15 EDT References: <572@mordred.purdue.UUCP> <820@ihwpt.UUCP> <185@anasazi.UUCP> Reply-To: rb@ccird1.UUCP (Rex Ballard) Organization: CCI Rochester Development, Rochester NY Lines: 60 Summary: Using 1 meg chips. In article <185@anasazi.UUCP> john@anasazi.UUCP (John Moore) writes: >In article <820@ihwpt.UUCP> knudsen@ihwpt.UUCP (mike knudsen) writes: >>> I read an article in this newsgroup suggesting that it was cheaper by >>> ~$200 to upgrade a 520 to 1Meg than to buy a 1040. My question is, >>(5) If you piggyback a 1040, you can put in 32 chips >>and go clear to 2 Meg. Don't ask whether the MMU chip >>can handle that much. In case you missed the Byte 1040ST >>article, the "extra" RAM chips are end-to-end with the "original" >>ones on the board. You could add just 512K the first time. >The RAM controller will NOT handle 2 Meg using 256K chips. To try to >modify the system to do that looks quite hairy to me. On the other >hand, the Byte article stated that your could upgrate the 1040 >to 4 Meg when the 1 Meg chips become affordable - just replace >the 256K chips and add an address line. The RAM controller will >handle that. It appears to me that you can to exactly the same >trick with a 520 - there is room on the board, and you would >just piggy back the same way as with the 1 Meg upgrade. You could convert either the 520 or the 1040 to up to 4 meg using 1 meg chips or 1 meg hybrid chips (about $30 each now). IF there were 18 pins in the RAM sockets, OR there were a header near the MMU, OR there were an adapter to get the necessary lines out of the MMU between the chip and the socket, OR ... BUT, you will have to pull out ALL of the old RAM and replace with 1 meg chips. When they mentioned how trivial it would be to upgrade the 1040 to 2 or even 4 meg, they were talking about how trivial it would be for ATARI to create a NEW IMPROVED PRODUCT. From the information I have been able to get, it looks like there is practically NO DIFFERENCE between the two, except that the 1040 has more memory and the internal drive and power supply. If having the internal drive (and fewer cables, power supplies,...) sounds desirable, or having the 1Meg right from the start without losing your warranty sounds good, then get the 1040. If you want to save a few dollars, get the 520. There is also the question of whether you should USE the extra memory, and how. If you want a RAM DISK, you could put one on the DMA interface. In fact, if Atari comes up with an SCSI interface, there are several such "drives" ranging from 1MB to 65MB. A RAM CACHE could also be installed externally. Putting "memory resident accessories" in ram is just a Kludge for real multi-tasking which could be better served by a real multi-tasking OS. A "does everything" application such as a "1-2-3" type package is yet another kludge which could be better served in other ways. An extra-large program that REQUIRES 1 Meg, such as GNU emacs or some equally large monster, won't run on the smaller machines. It would be nice if Atari could come up with an upgrade "MMU" chip that could realy do "memory management" such as demand paging, relocation, and protection, or maybe use the 68070 chip with it's built in MMU. Of course one could always make a "hot rod" computer using any of these techniques :-). Maybe they will AT LEAST put a SOCKET under the 68K chip so that the MMU and CPU could be upgraded later on. At least the ST is relatively easy to upgrade :-).