PDA

View Full Version : Genuine Kickstart ROMs: How can you tell?



Methanoid
30th June 2012, 16:46
Discussion removed from this For Sale thread (http://amibay.com/showthread.php?t=31599) to its own thread.



For A4000D V3.1 V40.70

Sorry, but V40.70 is for the A4000T not for A4000D :cool:

Is there any way also to tell the diff between genuine and non-genuine 3.1 - I need to buy one and would like to know how to tell and if there is any practical difference?

BLTCON0
30th June 2012, 21:04
Is there any way also to tell the diff between genuine and non-genuine 3.1 - I need to buy one and would like to know how to tell and if there is any practical difference?
Non-genuine are burned on off-the-shelf EPROMs, so there's no official print on them, typically just a sticker of some sort. Genuine ones have the official print right on the chip.
No practical difference (unless maybe a very slow EPROM is used).

AndyLandy
30th June 2012, 21:07
Is there any way also to tell the diff between genuine and non-genuine 3.1 - I need to buy one and would like to know how to tell and if there is any practical difference?
Non-genuine are burned on off-the-shelf EPROMs, so there's no official print on them, typically just a sticker of some sort. Genuine ones have the official print right on the chip.
No practical difference (unless maybe a very slow EPROM is used).

That's not always true. You can get legitimate ROMs which are stickered. I'm not sure if there is any good advice/guidelines on how to tell if your kickroms are genuine. Clearly if you get some which are printed, you can be fairly certain, but if you've got stickered ones, it's harder to tell.

bebek
30th June 2012, 21:12
Is there any way also to tell the diff between genuine and non-genuine 3.1 - I need to buy one and would like to know how to tell and if there is any practical difference?
Non-genuine are burned on off-the-shelf EPROMs, so there's no official print on them, typically just a sticker of some sort. Genuine ones have the official print right on the chip.
No practical difference (unless maybe a very slow EPROM is used).

That's not always true. You can get legitimate ROMs which are stickered. I'm not sure if there is any good advice/guidelines on how to tell if your kickroms are genuine. Clearly if you get some which are printed, you can be fairly certain, but if you've got stickered ones, it's harder to tell.

You are right, I have got genuine 3.1 for A1200 and A4000 with programmable IC's licensed and bought from Power Computing LTD.

BLTCON0
30th June 2012, 21:22
Yep, true, my 3.1 burned set is also legitimate from Vesalia. I interpreted "genuine" as burned vs non-burned as he asked about practical differences, but clearly the topic is wider :thumbsup:

AndyLandy
30th June 2012, 22:29
My basic rule-of-thumb: "If they're freaking heavy, they're copies." EPROMs tend to be ceramic packages, whereas genuine ROMs are plastic packages. I don't even know if this is guaranteed to be 100% accurate either, but it's a start.

Hmm, we seem to be going quite astray in someone else's for sale thread. This is a useful discussion though, I'll separate it out into its own thread...

Buzzfuzz
30th June 2012, 22:34
And I'll say it again, 40.70 DOES work in a 4000D!
And yes, I have a set in my 4000D CR in the Micronik tower, it just needs workbench.library in the libs and it will do fine.

FOL
1st July 2012, 00:19
And I'll say it again, 40.70 DOES work in a 4000D!
And yes, I have a set in my 4000D CR in the Micronik tower, it just needs workbench.library in the libs and it will do fine.

Indeed they do, :). Doing exactly as you said works fine.

hooverphonique
1st July 2012, 18:26
my original A4000D 3.0 roms have stickers on them, and they are the original chips that came with it way back when.. I'm running 40.70 softkicked, though ;-)

lostrego
1st July 2012, 18:42
Then seems that were endless N combinations of ROM chips, just in the style of the old Commodore way of doing things :lol:

On my 4000D original 3.0 chips were plastic packages, i.e. no EPROMS, no stickers.

Later (but long ago) I bought a 3.1 set on the evilbay that were allegedly original (the seller said that were used and stripped from a working 4000, didn't this sound familiar to anyone? ) those are EPROMS , ceramic package with stickers with nice copyright claim :lol:, but as always, coming them from evilbay who knows...

Tahoe
1st July 2012, 20:59
There are also original rom's based on eproms. Do not forget these rom's were licensed to (for instance) villagetronic which used eproms. When these were harder to obtain they switched to a Kick-It which was a small PCB with two smaller plcc type eprom on them.

Amiga Technologies also used eproms, the roms with the full chip sticker that says "Amiga" on it with a larger code and a small sticker which states the model and rom socket are also 27c400 IC's.

rkauer
3rd July 2012, 06:29
As a rule of thumb, hand-written labels are not genuine.

But other EPROM chips with printed labels might or not be genuine. Some have diagonal "Amiga" in faded grey with the version in bold characters, others have the "rainbow" mark in a side (the same rainbow used in A600 Workbench disks) and the version in the label. Lastly, some are plain white stickers with bold lettering and nothing more. <-yes, EPROM chips are a very grey area.

Only plastic ROM with masked version are 100% genuine as they can't be written, nor even read by a EPROM burner.

Zetr0
3rd July 2012, 09:54
...
Only plastic ROM with masked version are 100% genuine as they can't be written, nor even read by a EPROM burner.

Sorry to be contrary my friend, but I have had no problems backing up my official 3.0 and 3.1 ROM's. The plastic ic's that contain the Amiga ROM code are OTP ROM's (One Time Programmable) - they read just fine =)

In regards to the CDTV's extended ROM's these use a non-JEDC pin-out thus requiring an adapter to work with a regular PROM programmer.

As far as distributers go, I know of only Amigakit and Vesalia that have officially licensed product... the cheap stuff on eBay usually doesn't

Bad_Ad84
3rd July 2012, 09:57
If the Amiga can read it (to boot etc) so can an eprom programmer. Roms are designed to be read. Microcontrollers that use the code internally can be read protected (so the code can be used internally, but not read out).

Zetr0 - are they OTP eproms or are they maskroms?

OTP eproms and maskroms are not the same thing and I was under the impression they were the latter.

Edit:

They are maskroms, not OTP eproms. Found the part numbers and checked the datasheets.

Zetr0
3rd July 2012, 10:08
they could be either, I have not confirming data either way to be honest.

I suspect what ever the cheapest method of manufacture knowing commodore - with that in mind most probably mask-rom since they are cheaper to produce.

all-though it wouldn't be out of the realms of possibility for a few last minute production runs to be OTP say by Escom or Gateway...

Bad_Ad84
3rd July 2012, 10:10
Info I found:
http://www.amiga-stuff.com/hardware/2mbit-maskrom.html

with the MX variant being MX23C2100, which is a maskrom.

As you say, maskroms are cheaper (after committing and buying a certain amount at least -eproms are still cheaper on smaller runs).

rkauer
3rd July 2012, 18:51
And masked ROMS don't read on most EPROM programmers, for some reason (built-in firmware on the prommer stops this?).

At least on mine USB (with external 12.1V supply) I never be able to read a single masked ROM, even using the correct type of chip & manufacturer).

Bad_Ad84
3rd July 2012, 19:04
Mask roms have read fine on every programmer I have owned (4 different ones to date).

I have recently dumped unreleased bios mask roms from mega CDs and such too.

They are designed to be read, there is no read protection on them. Must be something with your setup.

Does your programmer have the actual maskrom device (mx23c2100)?

Because EPROMs have features that maskroms do not have. It might complain about a pin being missing if you select a EPROM device and try to read a maskrom (because that pin is nc on the maskrom, but does something on the EPROM). If you do not have the actual maskrom in your programmers software, you can usually get around it by disabling connection test before read (so it ignores the pin it thinks isn't there).



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk. Please excuse any crazy auto corrects or lack of detail (links to info sources)

rkauer
3rd July 2012, 21:31
Good to know, mate. Thanks a lot. Indeed my programmer does not have mask ROM chips (why they would have? They are read-only...).

Bad_Ad84
3rd July 2012, 22:16
Reading roms is a good way to confirm they are not bad/faulty. It's common to dump roms in arcade machines then compare crc to mame sets etc.

By selecting a comparably EPROM and disabling device/pin check it should work fine.

Out of interest, what programmer do you have? If its more fancy than a basic willem, it might have some checking like I mention above (I have a high end programmer now and it will thoroughly test all pins and current before read/writing)

As you dont have maskroms in your software.... For kickstart roms - Selecting 27c4100 (if it's in your software) and ignore pin test and ignore device id check should work. Then just split the file in half, as it will be an overdump.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk. Please excuse any crazy auto corrects or lack of detail (links to info sources)

rkauer
3rd July 2012, 22:29
It is a MPT-1020 (http://todaoferta.uol.com.br/comprar/programador-de-eprom-univ-csoftware-em-windows-mpt1020-H2KJDPRZID#rmcl) (don't panic at the price! Mine was way cheaper), asiatic origin.

Bad_Ad84
4th July 2012, 05:52
What's that in Gbp?

Mine was about 1000 :-/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk. Please excuse any crazy auto corrects or lack of detail (links to info sources)

bdb
4th July 2012, 06:48
My Willem was bought six months ago from a Canadian company for well less than 1/10 th that cost and is their top of the line only lacking a few adapters

Bad_Ad84
4th July 2012, 07:05
Yes, thats the GQ-4X - I have had one of those and its not comparable at all.

Once you purchase all the adapters, it came to around $400 (which I had). Also, the adapters are specialised. The ones for my new programmer are much cheaper than the willem adapters.

However, it cant do NAND at all and doesnt support a lot of chips I use - hence the upgrade. Its also extremely slow (but better than the parallel ones at least).

If you check the mcumall forums, you will see I am a regular poster there still :)


Edit:

@rkauer

The MPT-1020 is a rebadged Leaper 48:
http://uk.farnell.com/leap-electronic/leaper-48/programmer-universal-w-o-psu/dp/1216746

My current programmer (thinking about another upgrade!) is:
http://www.elnec.com/products/universal-programmers/beeprogplus/

So its most likely advanced enough to be doing device insertion tests etc before read/writing. This is probably why you had issues and is what I described earlier. You should have no problems (but I am downloading the programmer software now to see what options are available to you!).

Edit2:

Select device as MX27C2100 (DIP)
Parameters-> Common Setup

Untick "Insertion Test When Any Action" and "To Check IC ID-CODE When Any Action" and it should read the kickstart maskroms just fine :)

rkauer
5th July 2012, 02:08
Thanks a lot, BA! I was sure I was doing something wrong.

Will test and report back (or not, pending my own memory).

I already know it was a rebadged Leap prommer. Nice thing about it is the speed when programming PIC & GAL chips and the TTL tester.

Too bad it does not test memory chips.

Oh, and Farnell have a very nice price for the unit! R$3430 ~ 1085.

Bad_Ad84
5th July 2012, 07:14
Its actually quite feature comparable to mine. The only thing I do not like is the software interface =/

rkauer
5th July 2012, 07:26
Yeah, way too ancient (Win3.1/95 style). But it works.