6502.org

Ah yes, I hadn't caught that.  and3rson, you need at least a ground pin there.  The ground return is part of the signal path.  It's not just for power supply.  I think it's good to make the pinout such that with two ground pins (and hopefully two power pins also), accidentally plugging something onto the header backwards won't blow things up.  You'll see that in the 6502 primer at the right end of my schematic of a simple whole computer at http://wilsonminesco.com/6502primer/pot ... ml#BAS_CPU .  Next, note that IDCs (insulation-displacement connectors, the kind you mash onto a ribbon cable using a vise or similar tool) extend at least about .150" past the center of the end pins on each end.  A 14-pin IDC is about .900" long, and about ¼" thick.  We've had a few members here get boards made, assemble them, and then find out they hadn't left enough room.  Standard IDC sizes are 10, 14, 16, 20, 26, 34, 40, 50, and IIRC, 60 positions.  They don't come in 8, 12, 18, etc. positions.

You can find them if you search for them: https://www.lcsc.com/products/IDC-Conne ... c%20header but I would agree that ten pin (2x5) are handier to fit on ribbon cable

There is also the possibility of 0.05" (1.27mm) spacing IDC headers and connectors to reduce board space, but adaptors between the two are clunky.

Neil

Skinny (0.3") 64K SRAM chips are available at a nice price and take up less board space. I've been very happy with the SRAM chips from this vendor;

Well, what do ya know - that worked like a charm!

I've already had CPU & VIA turned 180 degrees - that drastically minimized the amount of rat nests. However moving the ZIF socket to the edge actually freed up a LOT of space - I guess I could have crammed an entire ACIA or SID in there!

The new layout is much more optimal, albeit a bit more scattered. In my previous version, I really liked how the power & clock section nicely occupied the leftmost column, and I also liked how chips followed the same order as in schematic, but hey - getting some extra clearance for I/O is more important than that!

Here's my new design. Everything is gravitated a bit too much to the left since I was trying to utilize as much space as I could. I'll increase spacing between the components once I'm satisfied with the overall layout.

Michael - I wish I knew about it in the beginning! I've already ordered full-width DIP-28 SRAMs, so I guess I'll stick to them for the time being. Still gonna order a bunch of those since they are really cheap!
Garth - thank you for all the tips on ribbon clearance. I've updated my pinout so that it is reverse-tolerant, and also added power rails to each VIA port - that makes a lot of sense.
Dr Jekyll - apologies for the color image of the PCB, it totally flew over my head. No more vividly colored schematics from me!

EDIT: Darn, I forgot to bump the version number to 0.8 on the silkscreen.
EDIT 2: Totally forgot - in case someone's interested, all my stuff is open-source, you can find all schematics & sources here: https://github.com/and3rson/m6502
EDIT 3: I've moved my I/O from $C000-$CFFF to $D000-$DFFF so that in future I can put SID on $D4xx for compatibility with C64.

Cool, now you have room to add a 40-pin RC6502 connector for video/keyboard and multi-channel serial boards. Then again, maybe that's too aggressive for first board.
Bill

Okay, cool! But what you've done doesn't quite match what I had in mind. And it might be possible to reduce the rats nests even further.
I couldn't spin the ZIF socket around because then the release arm would be hard to reach. But I do want the chip spun around, and of course that's easily done. In other words I'm suggesting you ignore the Pin 1 marking on the ZIF socket and always insert the ROM "backwards" -- ie, with Pin 1 toward the south. (You do have the somewhat goofy option of obscuring the original marking on the socket and making your own label to indicate where pin 1 belongs! )

If the chips are spun as shown (ie, CPU with pin 1 toward the north, and RAM, ROM and VIA with pin 1 toward the south) then I suspect the traces will become even tidier, and probably have fewer vias. I could be wrong, but it might be worth a try. BTW, notice how the four main chips are aligned to one another in terms of north-south; this too is part of the plan, and probably shouldn't be changed much.

One final suggestion (for now, at least)! You could save some more space by using a SIP resistor array to replace all the individual pullup resistors.

-- Jeff

That circuit board appeals much more to my sense of tidiness; I feel that automatic layout sometimes doesn't have the same aesthetic that I do

But then, I enjoy laying out a board with lots of chips... here's my 6502 SBC, which is easy, and a slightly more complex 8080 discrete component ALU.

Neil

@Jeff - I learned a long time ago that not having all the chips on the board facing the same way is a potential recipe for disaster. Sooner or later I'm bound to stick one in upside down!

If only the designers of 1970's processor packages had looked into the future and seen big JEDEC pinout memories and made their processor pinouts match

Neil

p.s. Am I the only one around here who uses SM passives mixed with PTH parts?

I do agree that there's a tradeoff involved, Neil. Sometimes (and perhaps quite commonly) a more compact design will come at the cost of decreased convenience in regard to remembering where pin 1 is found. One is obliged to weigh one priority against another, but that's nothing new... in fact it's the essence of engineering! And the "right" choice for one situation won't necessarily match the right choice where different circumstances and priorities prevail.

I suppose we should be grateful, not annoyed, at this complexity. Think how boring life would otherwise be!

ps: Good point, and thanks for the reminder. And no you're not the only one. Mixing SM passives into a through-hole design is a great idea. And those pullups I mentioned would be good candidates for replacement with SMT.

-- Jeff

@Jeff - that's a good idea! But knowing my short memory, I think I'll keep it as it is now since there's very little rat nests now.

@Neil - yeah, rotated 6502 & VIA were the only ways for me to go. I wish pin ordering matches the modern one, but hey, as they say - "One does not ask God for supplements.".

Also, after giving it more thought, I've decided to expose Ф2, R/W, /RD, /WD, /RES, /IRQ, data & address buses, and more power rails via pin headers. This will allow me to play with SID & ACIA later using a separate daughterboard or even a breadboard.

Here's what it looks line now.

EDIT: Forgot to rotate J4 & J6 to reduce the rat nest in there, and also to have them oriented the same way as other 4 headers.

EDIT 2: Seems like newer versions of phpbb support overline via syntax, which is simply translated into . This should be easy to add, I've checked 6502org on Github hoping to find a repo for this forum's phpbb installation in order to create a pull request, but seems like it's not there.

If you don't mind ponying up a little extra for an Aries ZIF socket (about $11 on Digikey, IIRC), you can face it however you want without worrying about the release arm.

This is turning into a great looking board, BTW! I might want one.

Thanks! I'm flattered.

Aries are super-nice, especially the low-profile ones... But man, are those expensive!