Another thought which may work the same as replacing the chips with LS types, is adding something like 10-33R in series with the power pins. If the current is reduced, then it may be enough reduction on ground spiking to get things working again. Will try and find some time to test that out as well.
Still no progress from JLC :(
STE video chip
-
exxos
- Site Admin

- Posts: 28357
- Joined: 16 Aug 2017 23:19
- Location: UK
-
exxos
- Site Admin

- Posts: 28357
- Joined: 16 Aug 2017 23:19
- Location: UK
Re: STE video chip
Tried 40R (YMMV) in series with the F374 power (Using the 1712 shifter)
BEFORE (STOCK)
AFTER (40R)
40R WITH GND WIRE
The 40R also solves the crackling sound with the 1712. When the F374 latches (on the rise) there is a noticeable reduction in noise when using the 40R in the F374 power rails. Adding the GND wire does improve things as well.
Proof is in the pudding as they say:
BEFORE (STOCK)
AFTER (40R)
40R WITH GND WIRE
The 40R also solves the crackling sound with the 1712. When the F374 latches (on the rise) there is a noticeable reduction in noise when using the 40R in the F374 power rails. Adding the GND wire does improve things as well.
Proof is in the pudding as they say:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
Steve
- Posts: 3305
- Joined: 15 Sep 2017 11:49
Re: STE video chip
Congrats @exxos this is brilliant, i'll be implementing both the GND and +5v resistor fix to my STe's straight away. I see with the resistor fix you just lift the +V leg out of the socket and solder the leg to the resistor and then to the +5v side of the ceramic caps behind right? Just checking.
-
exxos
- Site Admin

- Posts: 28357
- Joined: 16 Aug 2017 23:19
- Location: UK
Re: STE video chip
Thanks. Yeah just lift the 5V leg (I guess you would have to carefully cut it and lift the leg if its soldered in) and run 5V via 40R. 40R was just what I had to hand (roll of the dice value) but likely 47R or a little higher (maybe 68R) will likely be fine as well (but I only tested 40R) .Steve wrote: 10 Feb 2022 14:21 Congrats @exxos this is brilliant, ill be implementing both the GND and +5v resistor fix to my STe's straight away. I see with the resistor fix you just lift the +V leg out of the socket and solder the leg to the resistor and then to the +5v side of the ceramic caps behind right? Just checking.
-
exxos
- Site Admin

- Posts: 28357
- Joined: 16 Aug 2017 23:19
- Location: UK
Re: STE video chip
Out of curiosity I had a quick look for the differences on the output stage of the LS vs F series chips.
A quick Google-foo resulted in this.
It is the resistor at the top right I was interested in. It has been a couple of decades since I looked at all this stuff.. I thought the F-series did not have any resistor in series with the output stage but according to that schematic it does (***). 45R on the F-series and 120R on the LS series. So I guess 120-45=75R would be the active difference there.
*** I am probably thinking of the problem of MOSFET drivers which without deadtime can short out the power rails causing huge spikes. You would have to imagine that resistor is not there at all and then you have two transistors in series with the power rail with the transition of one turning off and the other turning on creates moment three short across the supply rail causes the voltage spikes etc
A quick Google-foo resulted in this.
It is the resistor at the top right I was interested in. It has been a couple of decades since I looked at all this stuff.. I thought the F-series did not have any resistor in series with the output stage but according to that schematic it does (***). 45R on the F-series and 120R on the LS series. So I guess 120-45=75R would be the active difference there.
*** I am probably thinking of the problem of MOSFET drivers which without deadtime can short out the power rails causing huge spikes. You would have to imagine that resistor is not there at all and then you have two transistors in series with the power rail with the transition of one turning off and the other turning on creates moment three short across the supply rail causes the voltage spikes etc
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
exxos
- Site Admin

- Posts: 28357
- Joined: 16 Aug 2017 23:19
- Location: UK
Re: STE video chip
Buffer boards finally shipped! Should be here thursday! :excited: :excited:
-
Badwolf
- Site sponsor

- Posts: 3043
- Joined: 19 Nov 2019 12:09
Re: STE video chip
Incidentally, I've been seeing this a bit fiddling with my RAM/booster board.
Is this possibly related to that clock skew problem or is this more like my board messing something up, you think?
(I've the -712)
BW
Is this possibly related to that clock skew problem or is this more like my board messing something up, you think?
(I've the -712)
BW
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
DFB1 Open source 50MHz 030 and TT-RAM accelerator for the Falcon
Smalliermouse ST-optimised USB mouse adapter based on SmallyMouse2
FrontBench The Frontier: Elite 2 intro as a benchmark
Smalliermouse ST-optimised USB mouse adapter based on SmallyMouse2
FrontBench The Frontier: Elite 2 intro as a benchmark
-
exxos
- Site Admin

- Posts: 28357
- Joined: 16 Aug 2017 23:19
- Location: UK
Re: STE video chip
I have seen that right from the start with the boosters, but also on stock machines. It mostly seems random when the machine is powered on. But its been so rare that I've not been able to look into it. But most likely is down to the clock skew.Badwolf wrote: 12 Feb 2022 16:26 Incidentally, I've been seeing this a bit fiddling with my RAM/booster board.
Is this possibly related to that clock skew problem or is this more like my board messing something up, you think?
-
exxos
- Site Admin

- Posts: 28357
- Joined: 16 Aug 2017 23:19
- Location: UK
Re: STE video chip
Looky what just arrived..
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
exxos
- Site Admin

- Posts: 28357
- Joined: 16 Aug 2017 23:19
- Location: UK
Re: STE video chip
A quick "bodge it in test".
BEFORE MOD
AFTER MOD
So indeed this does solve the problem with the 1712 shifter. I also tried the 588 and it still works fine.
I tried various combinations of delays. Long story short, buffering and double buffering does not do anything at all. The buffer delay seems to be incredibly small to make pretty much insignificant. It needs the extra delay there. The problem is the clock edges are still not synchronised because I should have used a inverter instead of a buffer :headbang: So I cannot actually do the experiment I wanted to. But changing the delay does make and break the graphics corruption, so these boards are still usable.
BEFORE MOD
AFTER MOD
So indeed this does solve the problem with the 1712 shifter. I also tried the 588 and it still works fine.
I tried various combinations of delays. Long story short, buffering and double buffering does not do anything at all. The buffer delay seems to be incredibly small to make pretty much insignificant. It needs the extra delay there. The problem is the clock edges are still not synchronised because I should have used a inverter instead of a buffer :headbang: So I cannot actually do the experiment I wanted to. But changing the delay does make and break the graphics corruption, so these boards are still usable.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: ClaudeBot and 7 guests