It is currently Tue Jun 27, 2017 3:22 am

All times are UTC - 7 hours





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 1:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:28 pm
Posts: 329
Location: Canada
Back then it was probably $3USD a piece. And yeah, after you factor all the DOA ones in it was really rather costly.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 1:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:49 am
Posts: 1819
Location: WhereverIparkIt, USA
About what I figured.. Nearly at the point where a guy could compete with the chip directly by designing up a 'breakout board' MMC3 for hobbist use. Ideally such a little board would be the same footprint and pinout as AX5202P for lack of a better standard. That would require something like dual XC9572XL or LC4064V to fit in DIP-40 footprint. That would run somewhere on the order of $5 of hardware though making it a loosing battle. 0.6" DIP is too narrow for TQFP-100 package unfortunately that would be needed to compete at $3 price point. Would have to jump to 0.7" wide DIP to support TQFP-100 package CPLD, and in that case you might be better off brewing up your own footprint/pinout to something more square for space optimization..

_________________
If you're gonna play the Game Boy, you gotta learn to play it right. -Kenny Rogers


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 2:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:28 pm
Posts: 329
Location: Canada
infiniteneslives wrote:
Would have to jump to 0.7" wide DIP to support TQFP-100 package CPLD, and in that case you might be better off brewing up your own footprint/pinout to something more square for space optimization..


Wouldn't even have to do that. Just surface-mount 90 degree dip headers to the underside of the board, and then you can use the existing footprint.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 2:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:49 am
Posts: 1819
Location: WhereverIparkIt, USA
Good call, although then the question is if fitting within AX5202P footprint is worth the added assembly complexity.

However the nature of such a product would suggest the user will be skilled enough to solder the SMT header themselves. Could integrate SMT male header at 0.6" pitch, and TH male header at 0.7" pitch into same layout.

_________________
If you're gonna play the Game Boy, you gotta learn to play it right. -Kenny Rogers


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 3:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:28 pm
Posts: 329
Location: Canada
Well if it was developed to be a hobbyist board, then you could use whatever footprint you wanted, really. I was just saying in the case of these specific boards, the same footprint could be used with the SMT headers.

If someone were developing their own code though, it would be ideal to use the AX5202P footprint so that they know for sure the board works as intended before they start writing their own mapper. Add a socket, try out the pirate mapper to verify the board works, and then replace it with a CPLD with some JTAG pins for easy programming.

Probably not worth all the effort, but it would be useful if someone were trying to utilize a board that was already built, instead of designing a new one.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 4 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:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group