[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: WDC 65C02

Subject: Re: WDC 65C02
From: "Vince Briel" <vbriel@removethisspamcamcast.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 13:40:37 -0500
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2, comp.sys.atari.8bit
References: <dLIUf.550$t22.534@dukeread08> <Pine.LNX.4.62.0603232127260.29184@static-141-149-129-16.buff.east.verizon.net> <otCdndrMMK2w_b7ZnZ2dnUVZ_tudnZ2d@comcast.com> <f62dncCAOPPu9b7ZnZ2dnUVZ_uudnZ2d@comcast.com> <mMKdnT4WKIuBtbnZRVn-rg@comcast.com> <1143222372.911379.224720@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.sys.apple2:5821 comp.sys.atari.8bit:2699

> This was because of the older ram chips' response time, correct?  If
> you wanted to upgrade the ram chips to faster ram, would that work?
> Would the same go for a //e as well?
>

Not sure, I never had to go any farther since Rich Dreher made the CFFA work 
on a IIplus. If I remember correctly, the RAM chips actually got hot with 
the C02 installed! It is entirely possible faster RAM would do the trick but 
it would just be easier to find an accelerator on eBay. Why risk frying a 
board.

Vince

-- 
Making computers fun again
See the new AltairPC
http://www.brielcomputers.com

Follow-Ups:
- Re: WDC 65C02
  - From: "Bill Garber" <willy46pa@comcast.net>
- Re: WDC 65C02
  - From: "Michael J. Mahon" <mjmahon@aol.com>

References:
- WDC 65C02
  - From: "Jack Tseng" <tseng4@hotmail.com>
- Re: WDC 65C02
  - From: Lyrical Nanoha <LyricalNanoha@dosius.ath.cx>
- Re: WDC 65C02
  - From: "Bill Garber" <willy46pa@comcast.net>
- Re: WDC 65C02
  - From: "Vince Briel" <vbriel@removethisspamcamcast.net>
- Re: WDC 65C02
  - From: "Bill Garber" <willy46pa@comcast.net>
- Re: WDC 65C02
  - From: "BLuRry" <brendan.robert@gmail.com>

Prev by Date: Re: WDC 65C02
Next by Date: Re: WDC 65C02
Previous by thread: Re: WDC 65C02
Next by thread: Re: WDC 65C02
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread