6502.org Forum  Projects  Code  Documents  Tools  Forum
It is currently Fri May 10, 2024 3:50 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2023 9:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2017 9:58 am
Posts: 91
Some time ago someone pointed out that (contrary to my belief that there's only one revision of the VIA / 6522 (i.e. Rev. 0))
MOS also produced a 2nd version "R1" for a short period of time (around 1988) but resumed using the Rev. 0 layout:

Attachment:
VIAs.jpg
VIAs.jpg [ 932.66 KiB | Viewed 547 times ]


One can distinguish the revision by looking at the second number (if present) on the MOS/CSG chips. For the 6522
it's either "10" (== Rev.0) or "11" (== Rev.1). This version can be found in 1541-II drives by example.

As the 6522 is plagued by the infamous shift-register bug we speculated if MOS/CSG fixed the bug but
withdrew that revision because of other incompatibilities or if it's even just a misprint!?
In order to find out finally I had to take a look at the silicon:

Attachment:
MOS6522R1_metal.jpg
MOS6522R1_metal.jpg [ 2.04 MiB | Viewed 547 times ]
-
Attachment:
MOS6522R0_marker.jpg
MOS6522R0_marker.jpg [ 886.32 KiB | Viewed 544 times ]


The result is that CSG just added a "(M) 1986 CBM" marker in the top left corner of the die AND
added a different (better?) ESD protection to the pins. The shift register control etc. doesn't seem to be different
at all (at least on the metal layer which I compared).

One can take a look at the bonding pad for the RESET# pin to get an idea of the change:

R0 v. R1:

Attachment:
MOS6522R0_reset_pad.jpg
MOS6522R0_reset_pad.jpg [ 433.68 KiB | Viewed 547 times ]
-
Attachment:
MOS6522R1_reset_pad.jpg
MOS6522R1_reset_pad.jpg [ 464.44 KiB | Viewed 547 times ]


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2023 5:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2018 1:53 pm
Posts: 727
Location: Tokyo, Japan
fhw72 wrote:
As the 6522 is plagued by the infamous shift-register bug we speculated if MOS/CSG fixed the bug but
withdrew that revision because of other incompatibilities or if it's even just a misprint!?

You know, usually on the Internet we end it right there, in order to have wide open space for argument from ignorance.

Quote:
In order to find out finally I had to take a look at the silicon....

Nice work!

_________________
Curt J. Sampson - github.com/0cjs


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2023 8:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 17, 2023 10:30 am
Posts: 2
Another MOS/CSG "special" :-)

"Improve" something, do not fix the obvious, run the batch, trash it and continue using the buggy one. :-D

Or the chip guys simply were feeling bored and possibly thought: "Hey, what do we want to improve today?"

@fhw72 Thanks for your efforts!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: