Omnimaga

Calculator Community => Other Calculators => Topic started by: DJ Omnimaga on October 03, 2009, 05:53:53 pm

Title: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on October 03, 2009, 05:53:53 pm
it seems Critor from TI-BANK might have found the issue, but it's still uncertain:

Start reading there http://www.unitedti.org/forum/index.php?s=f7b7b9f492cb8540d0c2338e370f28db&showtopic=8913&st=120&p=137093&#entry137093
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: Eeems on October 03, 2009, 06:53:02 pm
lol
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: critor on October 03, 2009, 07:18:03 pm
Hi people.


First, I wanted to look at hardware revisions to know which ones could use the 128Kb RAM and whice ones couldn't...

And my tests made the UTI thread ran into a wall: some hardware revision (JKL) could pass and fail the test...


So I got another idea.

And it's becoming more and more certain now...


Let's look at a TI-84+(SE) serial number.

It ends with something like:
A-1111B

where:
A is the manufacturer (S or P - both factories are in China)
1111 is the manufacturing date in format MM/YY
B is the hardware revision (A to M)

Here is my table, copied from UTI:
Code: [Select]
End of Serial   |128K RAM test   |LCD FPS test   |Boot Code   |CPU   |Type   |ASIC
                |(OK/FAIL)       |(120/240/280)  |(1.00/1.02) |(MHz) |(BE/SE)|(CPU/RAM chip)
----------------+----------------+---------------+------------+------+-------+------------------
S-0304          |                |               |            |      |BE     |TI-REF 83PLUSB/TA2
S-0504          |OK              |120            |1.00        |13.6  |BE     |TI-REF 83PLUSB/TA2
S-0504          |                |               |            |      |SE     |TI-REF 83PLUSB/TA2
S-0704          |OK              |               |            |      |       |
S-0704A         |OK              |               |            |      |       |
S-0804          |                |               |            |      |BE     |TI-REF 83PLUSB/TA2
----------------+----------------+---------------+------------+------+-------+------------------
S-0305C         |OK              |120            |1.02        |14.5  |SE     |TI-REF 84PLUSB/TA3
S-0605C         |OK              |               |            |      |       |
S-0605D         |OK              |               |            |      |SE     |
S-0306F         |OK              |               |            |      |       |
S-0506F         |OK              |120            |1.02        |15.2  |SE     |TI-REF 84PLUSB/TA3
S-0606F         |                |               |1.02        |      |BE     |TI-REF 84PLUSB/TA3
S-0207G         |OK              |               |1.02        |      |       |TI-REF 84PLUSB/TA3
S-0307G         |OK              |120            |1.02        |      |BE     |TI-REF 84PLUSB/TA3
S-0407G         |                |               |1.02        |      |SE     |TI-REF 84PLUSB/TA3
----------------+----------------+---------------+------------+------+-------+------------------
S-0607H         |FAIL            |               |            |      |       |
----------------+----------------+---------------+------------+------+-------+------------------
K-0308J         |FAIL            |               |            |      |       |
----------------+----------------+---------------+------------+------+-------+------------------
P-0308J         |FAIL            |240            |1.02        |15.9  |BE     |TI-REF 84PLCR/TA1
P-0308K         |FAIL            |               |1.02        |      |BE     |TI-REF 84PLCR/TA1
P-0308L         |                |               |1.02        |      |SE     |TI-REF 84PLCR/TA1
P-0408L         |                |               |1.02        |      |SE     |TI-REF 84PLCR/TA1
P-0508M         |FAIL            |120            |1.02        |15.7  |SE     |TI-REF 84PLCR/TA1
P-0808M         |                |               |1.02        |      |SE     |TI-REF 84PLCR/TA1
P-0509M         |FAIL            |2x0            |1.02        |      |       |

So you may notice severall things:

* sometime between late 2007 and early 2008, TI did transfer it's TI-84+(SE) production from the S chinese factory to the P chinese factory

* every TI-84+(SE) which fails the RAM test comes froms the P factory

As JKL hardware revisions were produced during the "critic" period (factory change), it could explain the various results:
JKL manufactured by S have 128Kb RAM usable
JKL manufactured by P have 48Kb RAM usable


We're still collecting test results for now.
So please, if you have a TI-84+, report the end of its serial number, and if the extra 128Kb RAM is usable (or if you prefer, if you can play the Game Boy emulator).


When we'll be sure the problem comes from the P-factory, we'll have to find two "theorically" identical calculators coming from both factories(same hardware in theory: JKL, same Boot Code, same model, same OS), and look for the difference.

When the difference is found, we'll have to solve the problem (if possible - if the 128Kb RAM is still there...)

EDIT: DJ: Updated table
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: TsukasaZX on October 03, 2009, 08:00:14 pm
Interesting theory you have going there. I'm glad we've got a solid line of reasoning going for this issue.

Oh, and for the record, my calc's serial number is S-0704 and the ASM write test program gave an okay.
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on October 03, 2009, 09:30:14 pm
nice, that could make things more understandable...

One thing I still wonder, though: Does these new 84+ got that 128 KB of RAM and is it just that only 48 KB is accessible in the ways we know or did they really remove 80 KB? The later almost seems impossible since a RAM chip can be 1 KB, 2,4,8,16 KB, but it kept multiplying by 2, so it jumps to 32 KB then 64 KB afterward. I wonder if a 48 KB RAM chip would even be possible at all? (or maybe they used one 32 KB chip along with a 16 KB one, but I kinda doubt it)

EDIT: Another thing I still wonder: does TI still produce calcs in Taiwan? One of my TI-83+ (the first I got) and my TI-83+SE are from Taiwan, but they were manufactured before the end of 2001
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: megasasquatch on October 04, 2009, 02:29:11 am
i've not run the tests on mine yet. mine is s-0306 with usable 23k ram
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: critor on October 04, 2009, 02:57:27 am
i've not run the tests on mine yet. mine is s-0306 with usable 23k ram

In 2006, there must be some letter after 0306...
It can't be the 1st hardware revision any more.
Can you check please? You should get something like DEF.


Ans please, do run the tests (or just try to run a Game Boy rom).

The system will allways show you 24Kb usable RAM, wether the chip is 32Kb, 48Kb or 128Kb.


But on the TI-84+ manufactured by S, the RAM chip is 128Kb big, and we can access the whole chip, and so play Game Boy roms.

On the TI-84+ manufactured by P, only 48Kb seem to be usable... We can't play Game Boy roms for now...


We need assembly tests to check that.
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: JoeyBelgier on October 04, 2009, 07:11:05 am
P-0308K isn't mentioned in your tabel
Obviously fails at tests and running Ti-Boy
crap
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: critor on October 04, 2009, 07:23:23 am
Thanks
P-0308K isn't mentioned in your tabel
Obviously fails at tests and running Ti-Boy
crap

Thanks! It's a very insteresting TI-84+ (right during the "critic" period).
Updated.
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: megasasquatch on October 04, 2009, 09:16:20 am
S-0306F does have 128k. I'm transferring Super Mario Land gameboy to it right now to see how it goes.
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: JoeyBelgier on October 04, 2009, 11:38:25 am
Thanks
P-0308K isn't mentioned in your tabel
Obviously fails at tests and running Ti-Boy
crap

Thanks! It's a very insteresting TI-84+ (right during the "critic" period).
Updated.
yw
btw, wanna trade? :P
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: critor on October 04, 2009, 11:40:35 am
Thanks
P-0308K isn't mentioned in your tabel
Obviously fails at tests and running Ti-Boy
crap

Thanks! It's a very insteresting TI-84+ (right during the "critic" period).
Updated.
yw
btw, wanna trade? :P

:P

no time for that...

btw if you go on UTI, I've found a difference between S and P TI-84+...
The CPU/RAM combo chip is simply not the same...
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: JoeyBelgier on October 04, 2009, 11:50:19 am
yh I read it :X EDIT: they have way less conections ><
So, when are we going to send bomb-packages to TI?  :)

EDIT:
Idea: Put all the testing things in one program (with a menu to switch between them) and put an attachment on a topic on the Ticalc site, they'll be interested to help, and since Ticalc still gets a lot of visitors you'll gain information quickly.
The reason to put them in one app/prgm is many people are too lame to use them else
EDIT2: let someone TI-famous post it, like Calc84Maniac, it'll attract more readers :P
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: TsukasaZX on October 04, 2009, 12:41:18 pm
Well now, that's pretty cruddy. I guess TI finally decided to 'correct' their 'problem' of wasting a 128KB TA3 chip by replacing it with a 48KB TA1 chip. Bloody 'eck, that was totally not fair :/
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: critor on October 04, 2009, 12:44:12 pm
Well now, that's pretty cruddy. I guess TI finally decided to 'correct' their 'problem' of wasting a 128KB TA3 chip by replacing it with a 48KB TA1 chip. Bloody 'eck, that was totally not fair :/


But that's still strange, because a 48Kb chip cannot exist...
It's not a power of 2!!!
Unless they've put a 32Kb chip,  plus a 16Kb chip inside that TA1 CPU/RAM combo chip...

Note, we're still note sure if TI did cut the RAM or not...
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: TsukasaZX on October 04, 2009, 01:10:53 pm
I meant KBs accessible by normal means, not KBs total. Whoops.

Anyway, yeah, we aren't sure but with a such a smaller chip, it seems likely to me (but who am I to doubt an integrated circuit by its size?)

[edit] Doesn't it kind of make sense though? The TI-OS doesn't USE the full 128KB of RAM. The only way to do so is to code your own application that does which is a feat that not any average Joe Shmoe can do. Seems logical TI would try to cut back on costs by replacing the TA3 chip with a cheaper and smaller TA1 chip (which could simply only have 64KB of RAM, 48 accessible due to configuration?)
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: Builderboy on October 04, 2009, 01:20:39 pm
Hmmm, This is all very interesting...

Unfortunately I can not contribute as of now, because I can't find my calculator! D:
I think i left it in a safe place though, so i should be able to pick it up tomorrow.

EDIZT:  Ninja'ed by Tsukasa :/  Congrats on your first Ninja ;D.  Anyway, I don't know if we are sure the TIOS doesn't use them, some peoplpe theorize that all of it is critical for USB Linking.
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: JoeyBelgier on October 04, 2009, 01:41:04 pm
It would be their right to cut down on the RAM
But it would have been their duty to say it too
certainly if you know your calc isn't only being used as a calc anymore <_<
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: critor on October 04, 2009, 01:47:58 pm
I want my X-RAM  back!
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: calc84maniac on October 04, 2009, 02:30:40 pm
Hmmm, This is all very interesting...

Unfortunately I can not contribute as of now, because I can't find my calculator! D:
I think i left it in a safe place though, so i should be able to pick it up tomorrow.

EDIZT:  Ninja'ed by Tsukasa :/  Congrats on your first Ninja ;D.  Anyway, I don't know if we are sure the TIOS doesn't use them, some peoplpe theorize that all of it is critical for USB Linking.

Sure it uses them - just not all 128KB.
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: megasasquatch on October 04, 2009, 03:41:10 pm
You said it critor. It'd be nice to have just in case.
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: Builderboy on October 04, 2009, 05:32:19 pm
Sure it uses them - just not all 128KB.

I mean we might not be sure that it does or does not use all 128kb.  Even though we can't access them, do we know for sure the TiOS can't?  (then again, we don't know if they still exist!)
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: calc84maniac on October 04, 2009, 08:45:42 pm
Sure it uses them - just not all 128KB.

I mean we might not be sure that it does or does not use all 128kb.  Even though we can't access them, do we know for sure the TiOS can't?  (then again, we don't know if they still exist!)
Well, given that we know exactly how the TI-OS accesses them and we do so in the same way, it's doubtful that the OS is accessing any more RAM than we are.
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: Builderboy on October 04, 2009, 10:04:15 pm
Mmmm, ok.  I'm not an assembly guy, so I wasn't sure.
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on October 05, 2009, 04:36:16 pm
Updated the calc table on the first topic page posted by Critor. Two interesting calcs were added to the list

S-0607H        
K-0308J

Both failed, but... K-??? This means there must have been a 3rd production factory somewhere. I remember back in the 83+ days some were produced in Taiwan instead of China. I wonder if it could still be the case...
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: JoeyBelgier on October 05, 2009, 04:42:18 pm
intresting D:
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: critor on October 05, 2009, 04:47:42 pm
Updated the calc table on the first topic page posted by Critor. Two interesting calcs were added to the list

S-0607H         
K-0308J

Both failed, but... K-??? This means there must have been a 3rd production factory somewhere. I remember back in the 83+ days some were produced in Taiwan instead of China. I wonder if it could still be the case...

K-0308J failing the test is coherent.
But S-0607H is failing the test too.

So maybe, the new TA1 chip has been included in the last 84+ manufactured by S-factory (H-revision).

We have ne entry between 06/2007 and 03/2008.
Maybe it's the K-factory which did manufacture during that period...


My new hypothesis would be:

You have 128K RAM if the 2nd part of your serial begins by S, and doesn't end by H.

or

You cannot play Game Boy ROMs if the 2nd part of your serial begins by P, or begins by K, or ends by H.


More entries during 04/2007-03/2008 will surely make things clearer.
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on October 05, 2009, 04:51:24 pm
True. It is really strange
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: calc84maniac on October 05, 2009, 04:52:16 pm
Other than the odd "L" calculator that works (still not sure about that), all data, even the data I collected a while before you started, showed that A-G worked, and H-M didn't.
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on October 05, 2009, 05:01:11 pm
Wasn't the L calc that worked the one when production went back to factory S?  For some reasons, it's missing from the UTI list
Title: TI-84+ hardware change info
Post by: critor on October 05, 2009, 05:04:29 pm
Wasn't the L calc that worked the one when production went back to factory S?  For some reasons, it's missing from the UTI list

I hope the production went back to S, else we will have a problem...
And the only way to be sure would be to open the calculator and check the chip.
(because the serial could have been changed: it's just a sticker - or the calc could have been serviced, and its hardware replaced...)

It's missing because the serial hasn't been reported yet.

I couldn't find where the K-factory is (very rare... unique up to now), but here is a very small table of TI manufacturing places:

I - Taiwan
K - ?
N - China
P - China
S - China
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on October 05, 2009, 05:11:40 pm
Aaah ok. However, wasn't there more calcs with tests that said it failed/ok'ed on them? I swear in the list there used to be one of the calc where production went back to S where it didn,t fail.

It is getting a bit confusing

What i wonder the most, though, is if the chips are 128 KB that are just not fully accessible through our usual methods or if they really put a total of 48 KB hidden RAM in these calcs... BrandonW on #tcpa said the later is near impossible because the TI-OS apparently use that 128 KB hidden RAM
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: critor on October 05, 2009, 05:44:00 pm
Ok, the L-revision calculator has been rechecked.
It was an error.

There is no problem any more.

Every TI-84+(SE) with hardware revision H and above, is failing the 128K RAM test, probably because of the TA1 CPU/RAM chip being used instead of the TA2/TA3 chips.


Next question will be: how much RAM is there really in the TA1? . . .
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on October 05, 2009, 05:45:48 pm
Aaah ok, so no "production was temporarly moved back to S factory" thing anymore?

Also, has any of the other listed calcs been tested in the ones that weren't?
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: critor on October 05, 2009, 05:47:15 pm
Aaah ok, so no "production was temporarly moved back to S factory" thing anymore?

no "production was temporarly moved back to S factory" thing anymore :)
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on October 05, 2009, 05:49:06 pm
aaah ok good, that removes some confusion then.

Also I wonder where all the new members that came just for the emulator went... because if they returned on Omnimaga and checked the threads, maybe they could post their serial number ending too and do some tests too (including the members who got the emu to run)... it would help a lot. I think we got at least 30 new members just for the TI-Boy SE emulator
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: jsj795 on October 05, 2009, 05:58:00 pm
wow... I think calc84maniac is the best recruiter for Omnimaga.org
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on October 05, 2009, 06:04:10 pm
Well to be fair he's pretty much like the Bill Nagel/Patrick Davidson of the 21th century. I could maybe say Sam Heald too, but IIRC, Sam Heald mostly just ported games, few of his files were his own games. Iambian would be next on the list. Calc84 got fewer games than Sam/PatrickD but many of his stuff are things that were not finished before (I don't recall seeing a 8 lv grayscale game for the 83+ before)
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: Builderboy on October 06, 2009, 10:22:48 am
Just for the record, My calculator is a S - 0406F  and it works great :)
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: Particl3 on October 06, 2009, 12:09:05 pm
aaah ok good, that removes some confusion then.

Also I wonder where all the new members that came just for the emulator went... because if they returned on Omnimaga and checked the threads, maybe they could post their serial number ending too and do some tests too (including the members who got the emu to run)... it would help a lot. I think we got at least 30 new members just for the TI-Boy SE emulator
thats pretty much how i came here =p.
anyways if you rly need this my calc is a P-0109M (84+SE) and it doesnt seem to work here . if you want i can do some test, just tell me what to you want me to do.
btw did anyone ever send an e-mail to ti asking for the excact specs of this ta1? doesnt seem too likly they wouldn't want to tell us.
Title: Re: DMCA notice from Nintendo
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on October 06, 2009, 12:30:05 pm
well, given the employees experience and them not wanting to tell much info, like someone said on UTI forum I think they'll tell you your calc has 24389 bytes of user RAM and 1540 KB of archive, no matter how hard you try to ask them more info
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: Misklahr on October 11, 2009, 10:15:01 am
Well, i'm kinda new to my calculator, it's a TI-84 Plus.
My serial at the end is "S-10071" (I got it about a week ago)
When I press [2nd]->[+ ] (MEM) then go down to [Mem Mgmt/Del...] then [Enter] it says:

RAM FREE: 11784
ARC FREE: 464169

My question is if I can have the gameboy simulator (TIboy) and play Pokemon Red/Blue on it? Just like I did on my "Gameboy COLOUR"

Thanks :)
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: calc84maniac on October 11, 2009, 12:19:20 pm
Are you sure it isn't S-1007I?
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: JoeyBelgier on October 11, 2009, 12:53:54 pm
probably it is
anywho, sorry you won't be able to play it, a regular TI84+ just doesn't have enough place to fit it on
smaller games should work tho, I think...
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: Misklahr on October 11, 2009, 01:04:40 pm
Are you sure it isn't S-1007I?
Well, it's hard to see, because it looks like the "1" after the "S-"
So..  then the TI-84 plus don't have enough memory, like NecroF-_-ckk said?
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: JoeyBelgier on October 11, 2009, 01:06:16 pm
I'm sorry  to say you'll need a TI84+ Silver Edition for Pokémon
Kirby, Tetris and other smaller games should work tho
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: calc84maniac on October 11, 2009, 03:29:26 pm
Though, if it really is an I, it won't work at all. The "1007", for October 2007, seems to be after the time of the hardware change anyway.
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: critor on November 02, 2009, 03:59:41 am
Though, if it really is an I, it won't work at all. The "1007", for October 2007, seems to be after the time of the hardware change anyway.

Yes, if we're right (up to now we ARE right), it won't work...

The I-hardware revision is too recent...


But it would be interesting to try, as if I remember well, we haven't had I-revisions for our tests...

We got FGH, and then JKL revisions.


Does anybody have finally figured out what's inside the TA1 chip?
(by asking TI... by exploding the chip... by testing it electronically...)
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on November 02, 2009, 04:10:53 am
Not yet, the entire thing seems to have died down :(

I know on Omni this is less likely to happen, since everyone here are into game developpement, not hardware, but I hope someone in #tcpa like BrandonW or someone on UTI or Cemetech can discover the issue. I am really curious what RAM there is in it, in total
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: Galandros on January 13, 2010, 03:38:21 am
Before we know what happened to the RAM, BrandonW released in his website a routine to test if the calculator has the extra RAM pages.
http://www.brandonw.net/calcstuff/ramtest.zip

The test is simple but coming from Brandon, it should work...
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: mapar007 on January 13, 2010, 03:47:49 pm
Dr. DNar had written a working test too. (maybe brandon uploaded it to his site?)
Anyway, the fact that it  is on his site probably indicates the thing works.  ;D
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on January 13, 2010, 04:13:35 pm
Yeah I saw this several months ago, altough I am not sure if it was posted on Omnimaga
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: Galandros on January 13, 2010, 04:34:21 pm
Why hasn't calcmaniac84 updated the TI-Boy to test RAM and warn? >:(
hehehe just needing an excuse to use the emotion. xD

It would be nice to have such test. The warning on readme should be kept to prevent people delete almost or all archive to accommodate TI-Boy.
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on January 13, 2010, 04:40:45 pm
TI-Boy actually warns if you have a faulty hardware. At least, it does since version 0.3 Alpha
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: Samip on April 13, 2010, 07:08:15 pm
I have a TI-84 Plus Silver Edition and when I try to run Pokemon Red, it gives me the ram error.
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: jsj795 on April 13, 2010, 08:08:45 pm
you probably don't have extra ram page. What is the hardware version? It's the last letter of the serial number found on the back of the calculator
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on April 13, 2010, 08:28:25 pm
If it ends with the letter H or higher, it's most likely a newer calc. If it has no letter or ends with A through G then it should normally work
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: willrandship on April 13, 2010, 10:46:15 pm
it seems like TI has caused yet another awful mess, but this time on the Hardware side. I don't think they even did it intentionally! They probably noticed that for normal use no one ever stick much stuff in the archive anyways, and decided to save a few bucks by omitting some RAM pages from the ICs!
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on April 13, 2010, 11:13:13 pm
Nah I doubt they did that one to halt dev, because the TI-Nspire came out not long after and the Nspire actually emulates that 128 KB of RAM in 84 mode. They probably did it to reduce production costs, because, you know, $0.005 for an additional 80 KB of memory is A LOT for a big company like Texas Instruments :P
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: jsj795 on April 14, 2010, 01:53:24 am
What sucks is that I have H model -_-;; It kind of sucks when you are just out of reach to all the stuff you can do with the extra ram :(
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on April 14, 2010, 02:20:07 am
I wish TI didn't do this, it pretty much killed hopes for TI-Boy SE. I am sure Calc84 would have developed it much further if newer calcs didn't have this issue. What also sucks is how not only TI-Boy SE has issues with the new calcs x.x

I hope Calc84maniac 84+ emulator for the Nspire can run all undocumented instructions and the extra RAM so we can use Omnicalc virtual calc/mem and other stuff like that, altough for running GB games on the Nspire it will be more practical for people to just download gbc4nspire :P
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: Galandros on April 16, 2010, 02:10:01 pm
I hope Calc84maniac 84+ emulator for the Nspire can run all undocumented instructions and the extra RAM so we can use Omnicalc virtual calc/mem and other stuff like that, altough for running GB games on the Nspire it will be more practical for people to just download gbc4nspire :P
lol
Better use gbc4nspire. But until some sound apps comes to Nspire, it would be cool to hear RealSound in the emulated TI-84+SE, anyway. :P
(oh no, an idea to calcmaniac... ._.)
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on April 16, 2010, 06:17:19 pm
I think they have yet to figure out how to play sound through the link port on the Nspire, though, if it's even possible at all.
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: ztrumpet on April 16, 2010, 08:14:21 pm
I'm pretty sure the link ports don't work yet on the calc84's emulator, so sound's not possible.  Yet...  ;)
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: mapar007 on April 17, 2010, 04:10:34 am
TI, we can haz docs?

/me crosses his fingers
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on April 17, 2010, 12:01:08 pm
That said, I am curious if when switching the keypad it will be possible to have sound in the future ^^
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on July 07, 2010, 04:46:01 pm
I am not sure if this is a false alarm or not, but...

Michael.3545 has reported that Omnicalc's RAM Recovery doesn't work on his TI-84 Plus regular edition.

His serial number ends with K-0507F.

One of the mysterious K factory calc, but the ending letter matches the letter of calcs that reported 128 KB of RAM (A through G or no letter). On UTI, the "K-0906B" calc passed the test (meaning it had 128), while the "K-0308J" one failed it (meaning it had 48).

Michael.3545 should test his calc to see if he is missing RAM. If he does, then his calc will have broken the trend where all calcs ending with either no letter or a letter from A to G has 96 KB of additional RAM while H or higher only has 16.

http://ourl.ca/4866/101091
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: calcdude84se on July 07, 2010, 04:54:16 pm
Well, again, it's the K factory :P
DJ: I'm writing a program to test if one has the full 128 KB or the lesser 48 KB of total RAM right now, and will upload it upon completion
Title: Re: TI-84+ hardware change info (causing all APPs using extra RAM pages to crash)
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on July 07, 2010, 05:07:50 pm
Didn't someone else made one, tho? Again, Idk where is it on UTI and if it's still around anymore.

I'll also rename this thread and move it out of the TI-Boy SE sub-forum, since it isn't only TI-Boy related anymore.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: calcdude84se on July 07, 2010, 05:23:38 pm
I made another one :P
It's designed to be run from the homescreen with Asm(
If you have XRAM, the program will return, saying nothing.
If you don't, it'll say FAILED, and then return.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on July 07, 2010, 05:28:27 pm
XRAM as extra RAM, right? (well, the entire extra RAM, since technically every 15 MHz calcs has some sort of extra RAM)
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: calcdude84se on July 07, 2010, 05:30:31 pm
Right, by XRAM I mean the extra 96KB of RAM that the older 84's and the 83+SE had. No XRAM means only 16KB extra, in this case.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: nemo on July 07, 2010, 05:32:49 pm
would you like us to report our serial code / if we have xtra RAM? if so my serial code is S0404 and i have the extra RAM. my LCD delay is 28, according to zStart

edit: my calculator is a teacher calculator too, if that means anything.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: Lionel Debroux on July 08, 2010, 02:55:52 am
BrandonW's program, which should be equivalent to calcdude's: http://brandonw.net/calcstuff/ramtest.zip
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: Deep Toaster on July 08, 2010, 02:59:22 am
There are teacher calcs?

What's the difference between teacher calculators and normal calcs?
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on July 08, 2010, 03:54:15 am
In the 81 through 83 as well as 85 through 89, they have an additional port behind them for the viewscreen adapter. I don't know about the USB calcs, tho
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: ztrumpet on July 08, 2010, 09:49:33 am
In the 81 through 83 as well as 85 through 89, they have an additional port behind them for the viewscreen adapter. I don't know about the USB calcs, tho
84s have them too.  Here's a video showing one of brandonw's: (13 seconds in)
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on July 08, 2010, 12:27:17 pm
Aaah cool, thanks for the info. I wasn't sure anymore
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: DragonsXPS on October 14, 2010, 03:31:07 pm
My Calc is a TI-84 Plus Silver Edition, i got it in late 2006.
Ran the appropriate tests on it all of them passed, so I'm guessing my calc has 128K of RAM in it.
Anyways the serial number is S-1005D.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: qazz42 on October 14, 2010, 03:41:00 pm
that means you are lucky and can use programs like TI-Boy and emu8x to the fullest!

tho, calc84 is working on a version of TI-Boy that will run on newer calcs, which I hear is progressing rapidly :D
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on October 14, 2010, 05:39:17 pm
Nice, you can use the current version of TI-Boy SE  (and a few other programs mentionned in this thread) :D

Welcome here by the way :)
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: qazz42 on October 14, 2010, 05:53:54 pm
yeah, virtual-calc too
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: demontranoth on December 13, 2010, 06:23:55 pm
Hi, I just thought I'd say that I have a Ti84+ SE and the serial is P-0508M . I do not have the extra ram. I know you have pretty much settled on which calculator have and don't have it but I don't think any more info hurts.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: Ashbad on December 13, 2010, 06:25:53 pm
thanks, and welcome to omnimaga, demontranoth!  enjoy your stay! :D
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on December 13, 2010, 06:27:05 pm
Hey and welcome on the forums! :) And no problem. Although now we have figured that calculators past letter G have missing RAM pages, it would be good to see in the future what some calcs with further letters (if any) has to offer inside. It would be weird if TI suddently decided to put more RAM pages in again. X.x
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: Darl181 on December 13, 2010, 06:27:54 pm
I have a really old 84PBE... BOOT code 1.02, serial thing S-0305B.  It definitely has the extra pages.

However.

I'm not sure if something screwed up on my end or if it's TI's random things that they do for little or no reason...but it only takes up to 10 apps (not counting the finance junk)...?  :wtf:

It's been like this as long as I've had it.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: FloppusMaximus on December 13, 2010, 10:17:25 pm
Thanks to the structure of the Flash memory, it's possible to have a substantial amount of "free archive space" yet be unable to install an app.  If memory is full when you try to archive something, the OS will show an error message telling you (a) the largest possible variable you could archive, and (b) the largest possible app you could install.  The two numbers may be quite different.

If you have more than 64k free and still can't install any apps, I don't know what else might be wrong.  Have you tried a full archive reset?
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on December 14, 2010, 03:33:28 am
He did, he also tried an OS re-install. I wonder what happened to his calc...

Darl181 can you use all archive but with non-app files?
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: calcdude84se on December 14, 2010, 04:54:59 pm
Just to recommend something that probably won't help, type up this ASM program and run it:
Code: [Select]
AsmPrgm
DB0217F5380921CD
9DEF0A45EF2E45F1
17300921D49DEF0A
45EF2E45DB211FF5
380921DF9DEF0A45
EF2345F11FD021E6
9DEF0A45EF2E45C9
54492D38332B0054
492D38342B285345
290054492D38342B
0024323120426974
20312053657400
For a plain TI-84+ it should say
Quote
TI-84+(SE)
TI-84+
Just some reading from the ports that are supposed to give hardware type. Again, it probably won't help, but at least make sure it says what it's supposed to :D
Edit: I will upload a .8xp shortly if you don't want to have to type ;D
Edit 2: Here you go!
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: Darl181 on December 14, 2010, 07:15:08 pm
Thanks calcdude, will try.

It's correct.
Code: [Select]
TI-84+(SE)
TI-84+

DJ, I try to keep the archive as free as possible to avoid Garbage collects (which I get every two-three hours of use), but once I filled the archive to within 10K bytes about a month ago, when the game part of TWHG became an app.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: calcdude84se on December 14, 2010, 07:56:03 pm
Well, that's annoying... (I mean, it's good that the ports for checking hardware type read correctly, but it doesn't make the problem more visible)
Can you use Axe to compile apps beyond the ten you can send with TI-Connect?
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: qazz42 on December 18, 2010, 09:21:19 am
I wonder, how hard would it be to make things like virtual-calc compatible with the extra-ramless calcs? I would like to see Virtualcalc and Emu8x compatible :/
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on December 18, 2010, 05:30:44 pm
Both would require the current RAM content to be archived before launching the virtual calc or emu, then unarchived when exiting, while the savestate is archived. This might be feasible, but it seems like it would cause a lot of flash writing.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: FloppusMaximus on December 18, 2010, 10:34:29 pm
Virtual Calc is probably a lost cause.

Omnicalc-like RAM backups, though, might be possible, by backing up only the parts of memory you actually care about (mainly programs and variables.)  You could also try compressing the data.  On the other hand, keep in mind that there are a fair number of programs that will use the (single) extra page for scratch space, and overwrite your backup.  As opposed to the current situation, where programmers are aware of Omnicalc, and try to avoid using those last four pages if they can.  (At least, I do.)

As for Emu8x, I haven't looked at its internals in much detail.  Emulating an 81 shouldn't be hard, though, and using the same backup techniques as above, emulating an 82, 83, or 85 isn't out of the question.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on December 18, 2010, 11:25:53 pm
VirtualCalc wasn,t very stable anyway. If you archived a program in one calc but not the other, you could mess up your VAT, I think. I remember even a RAM clear didn't fix it.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: JosJuice on December 19, 2010, 02:57:33 am
VirtualCalc wasn,t very stable anyway. If you archived a program in one calc but not the other, you could mess up your VAT, I think. I remember even a RAM clear didn't fix it.
Yeah. Since the VAT is in RAM, there are two different VATs - one for each calculator. However, the archive memory itself must be shared between the calcs since there is nowhere to store the data for a second archive.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on December 19, 2010, 05:23:44 am
Yeah that's why. If you archive a var in the 2nd calc, for example, then delete the one in RAM from the first calc, then perform a RAM clear, the one in the archive will vanish.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: jnesselr on December 19, 2010, 10:41:42 pm
I never knew that. I just used virtual calc like tabs when I wanted to work on two separate projects with many programs.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: qazz42 on December 24, 2010, 09:04:40 pm
eh, no virtual calc is fair enough, but emu8x is something I would really really like to see. :D
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: Freyaday on May 10, 2011, 04:59:51 pm
How do I test my calc?
TI 84+SE
P-0409M
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: ztrumpet on May 10, 2011, 05:02:26 pm
P-0409M
The M means it doesn't have the "full" RAM.

This is the program I used to try and find the pattern (efforts were spearheaded by critor; that's the thread things were discovered in).
http://www.unitedti.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=8913&view=findpost&p=136725
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: Freyaday on May 10, 2011, 05:03:55 pm
P-0409M
The M means it doesn't have the "full" RAM.

(I'll edit this when I find a link)
I'd still like some tests so I know for sure.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: jnesselr on May 10, 2011, 05:04:49 pm
It's missing the ram pages. I guess you could test it by using calcsys to write a byte on page 83, and then check if it's there in page 84.  I believe they act like a single page, so this should work.  But I can tell you that because it's M, then it most definitely has them missing.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on May 10, 2011, 05:06:23 pm
I wonder what is the latest letter now? I know my 84+ is N.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: calc84maniac on May 10, 2011, 05:06:26 pm
It's missing the ram pages. I guess you could test it by using calcsys to write a byte on page 83, and then check if it's there in page 84.  I believe they act like a single page, so this should work.  But I can tell you that because it's M, then it most definitely has them missing.
Unfortunately, Calcsys doesn't allow you to hex-edit in the $4000-$7FFF region, even if it is mapped to RAM.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: jnesselr on May 10, 2011, 06:29:52 pm
It's missing the ram pages. I guess you could test it by using calcsys to write a byte on page 83, and then check if it's there in page 84.  I believe they act like a single page, so this should work.  But I can tell you that because it's M, then it most definitely has them missing.
Unfortunately, Calcsys doesn't allow you to hex-edit in the $4000-$7FFF region, even if it is mapped to RAM.
Well, you can still write a quick program to do it can't you.  Just write a small asm program to swap the page in, write the byte, and then swap it back out.  That should work, shouldn't it?
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: Billeekid on September 20, 2011, 03:37:09 pm
Hello I just joined here because of this topic, I just took apart a brand new TI 84+ SE  serial number ends with a P-0411R so it's quite new if R means its revision number.  I took it apart and it seems there are only two identifiable chips that could possibly be processor and memory.  My guess is the one that says TA1 is of course the chip housing the processor, and the other large chip must be the ROM.  Taking an educated guess(I'm a mech. engineering student), from what I've learned with manufacturing and my own research, I believe the processor and RAM share the same die. So the ROM by itself can be changed more readily and cost effectively, depending on model and other factors, whereas the processor die would require a complete redesign and would be designated as such if the RAM was changed.  I'm totally speculating but i think that all TI 83+ and up and TI 84 and up have a very similar architecture and that all earlier calculators designated TI 83 would be similarly functioning but different architecture/board(correct me if I'm wrong).  Don't quote me here, but I'm convinced that some RAM was ditched on the TA1 marked dies with concerns related to either power consumption or maybe the chip supplier changed entirely(i changed my theory to bandwidth issues, lol).  If you look at what I believe is the ROM (the chip not marked TA1)you can see a logo that says "Spansion".  Maybe on earlier calculators the processors were actually produced by a third party supplier as well as the ROM.  My calculators processor says TI REF and JAPAN on the die with no trademarks at all.  My question would be what does the earlier "xram" calc's chips say?  You really have to look at the pcb and it's layout to distinguish any major changes and then of course any chips soldered to the board, lol.  I'm using a lot of big words but I think they're all in the right context.  I'll quickly post a picture showing what I'm all talking about, and what each chip says.  Maybe this can help determine what happened to the "xram calculators" of course you would need to catalog other serial numbers and there corresponding chips to really get an idea of what really changed through out the production of TI 83 and the TI 84 family of calculators.           
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: Billeekid on September 20, 2011, 03:46:17 pm
TI REF
84PLCR/TA1
T6UN0AFG-0001
JAPAN 1039 HAL
086078
processor chip

Spansion
S29AL016D70TFI
914FF119 G
(copyright symbol) SPANSION
ROM

B48.000
KDS 1B
TAIWAN
smaller chip maybe a memory controller?


(http://i1121.photobucket.com/albums/l507/Billeekid/TI84.jpg)

Unfortunately I can't get the photo off my camera.  This isn't my calculator it's something I pulled off the internet.  It's a TI 84+ fortunately the chips are in the same place, the print on the chips isn't legible in this photo. After looking at this photo I can see some very obvious differences, but I guess that should be expected(thepenguin helped clarify this). Surprisingly the only components that appear to be in the same spot is the main chips and where all of the "external" connections are.  This photo is fine for my purposes but just about every other little circuitry tidbit is in a totally different spot.  One question would be has anyone catalogued an onboard memory controller?  I find it hard to imagine that the processor has that kind of feature built into it. That is a giant factor in determining usable memory with a PC, even though most all new computer processors do have that feature. I understand that the ROM is flash memory, so would that mean it could be used as RAM? I haven't really educated myself on computer memory. I guess an analogy for myself would be kind of like an automotive mechanic, one that works with electrical all the time but has no real explanation for it.  I've built multiple computers troubleshooted memory and boot errors, but I have no idea how RAM really works.  I'm gonna get ahead of myself and ask, could the ROM be used as RAM even if there would be a more than likely inherent bottleneck some where in between?  I guess I could look really hard on the internet and never post on here again, but my conclusion on this matter might be totally wrong, lol.  I just wanted to say I do appreciate the feedback, and I was surprised at how fast thepenguin responded.  If there is any other info I can provide for cataloguing purposes, my calculators packaging does happen to say 2011 on it, lol.  I am kind of dissapointed I can't get GameBoy games on my calculator, but I did afterall buy it to use for school(my first graphing calculator!).  Interesting topic though  :)
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: thepenguin77 on September 20, 2011, 04:08:32 pm
Welcome, it's nice to see some one so excited to figure this out. However, not to be rude, but we have kind of already discovered the things you just mentioned.

For instance, We know that there have been 3 major revisions of the ASIC which can be determined through an internal port (http://wikiti.brandonw.net/index.php?title=83Plus:Ports:15). For more information on the different revisions, check out this topic over at UTI (http://www.unitedti.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=8913&view=findpost&p=137113).

As far as when the extra ram was eliminated, we are also pretty certain about when that happened. For one, the final ASIC revision has fewer pins than the previous versions. Then, using the chart I linked to over at UTI as well as a more recent study conducted by DrDnar (http://ourl.ca/12021/229307), we have determined that the exact time TI cut out the ram was between hardware revisions G and H.


You were right, the chip labeled Spansion is indeed the ROM, it's actually Flash memory though, so it can be changed programmatically. (DrDnar's topic has a lot of info on it.)

As for the smaller chip, I'm not sure, I'm sure some one with more hardware knowledge could tell you.

A few other things, 1) the 83+ and 84+ are actually pretty different hardware wise, however 2) The 83+SE, 84+BE, and 84+SE all are exceptionally similar, so similar in fact that recently, we have begun to reason that the 84+BE and 84+SE are the exact same hardware except for the Flash memory and case color.


(Lastly, again not being rude, people typically don't like double posts here. You're find because you're new, but next time, just edit the post or add a few returns in.)
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: Billeekid on September 20, 2011, 07:05:09 pm
I saw the pictures of the different processors, having different pin counts.....  I have been looking really hard for a reason why TI would remove RAM, and unless I'm mistaken all units of memory are multiples of two and especially since these "xram" calcs have 128KB RAM wouldn't that mean that the calculator is fundamentally based on the 8-bit principle.  How can you implement a 24KB unit size RAM without fundementally changing the operating principle of the calculator.  If it is normal for all calculators in this family to display about 24KB of RAM, that would probably mean that that number is software/OS based not hardware dependent.  TI graphing calculators are 8-bit correct!?  I have to believe that the 25x4 pin configuration (which was incorrectly stated 25x25) vs. 36x4 pin would be the source of a limiting factor.  Maybe a function that I'm not aware of puts a cap on memory at roughly 24KB?  I just spent about a half hour reading up on the 8-bit principle but I'm trying my best to understand  ;D   I'm just not satisfied with the thought that they simply removed memory, RAM for computers was extremely cheap for a while(I watch that kind of stuff lol) and the stuff advanced through two version of the DDR architecture and just about quadrupled the speed of the original spec. speed at about half the cost in only a few years.  So, RAM wouldn't be removed as a factor of cost, but more likely it arises from a hardware bottle neck, maybe there's 32KB actual memory and only a number close to 24 of that memory is actually usable? The hardware bottleneck, would be the processor bandwidth.  In TI's eyes the newer processor/architecture probably fit the bill perfectly or near perfectly for the existing software demands, and anyways why would TI care if this prevents programs with high memory requirements such as emulators from running.  It's unfortunate/fortunate that effort has been put about in these amazing emulators, I've seen them run and I have know idea how you guys do it, but I can't imagine that TI thought people would make such things. I think 24KB was just a number TI found was more than enough to not only run what apps it wanted you to use but also a number that it didn't expect to be exceeded in demand.  It is unfortunate that for whatever reason, the newer calcs come only with a conservative amount of RAM.  I think that the old processor took the xtra ram with it when it left  >:(
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: AngelFish on September 20, 2011, 07:11:21 pm
Holy wall of text :P

As it turns out, the z80 chip (which is the same chip as in the older calcs with more pages) inside the TI-83+/84+ Series is 16 bit and can address 16 KB pages. The OS gets around this with a scheme known as paging.

As for the memory, the calculator does have 32 KB. Only 24 is user accessible because the rest is used by the OS.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: Billeekid on September 20, 2011, 07:23:35 pm
, the calculator does have 32 KB. Only 24 is user accessible because the rest is used by the OS.

I see that makes some sense, I guess I just didn't come across that.  I still am wondering if the ROM is actually a programmable flash memory, could it be used as RAM?  I guess it would be extremely slow compared to the onboard/chip RAM but maybe it would allow some things to be ran at slower speeds besides emulators.  I don't know if there is any other factors that are left out, but that's my understanding of flash, lol.  I think someone needs to determine what that third marked chip that I pointed out is, I think that might be the controller I've dissasembled a lot of electronics and I think it looks a heck of a lot like the memory controller on a flash drive, thats the only other type of component  I can think of that would be given it's own markings.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: AngelFish on September 20, 2011, 07:25:41 pm
Technically, ROM could be used as swap space, but it takes special protocols to write to it (because writing a 1 anywhere clears the whole 16 KB page the 1 is written on). Also, writing to flash wears it out, so you'd eventually end up unable to use it reliably.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: ztrumpet on September 20, 2011, 07:30:46 pm
Hi, and welcome to Omnimaga, Billeekid.

Pertaining to the amount of RAM discussion, this is what the calcs have:
8 KB - Reserved for OS usage.  I believe these are addresses 0000h to 8000h on Page 0.
24 KB - User Mem.  Though there is technically some of this space (8000h to 9D95h) is claimed by the OS, the rest of it is for programs and other variables stored in RAM, as well as the VAT and some other OS stuff.
16 KB or 96 KB - "Extra RAM."  This is used by the OS on some occasions, most notably with the BasePageTable for Apps on some OSes.  If I remember correctly, the Math Print (MP) OSes also use some of this memory as well.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: thepenguin77 on September 20, 2011, 07:38:21 pm
I was surprised at how fast thepenguin responded.

You can't see it yet (due to post count), but we have a IRC client embedded in the page. This leads to very quick replies to posts.

As far as the amount of ram the calculators actually have, you are right, it is not 24KB, that is just the amount that TI advertises to the public and is the amount officially supported for saving user variables and such. However, you don't have to listen to TI's demands when programming, so, in reality the old calculators had 128KB of ram and the new ones have 48KB of ram (8 and 3 16KB pages.)

While the z80 is an 8 bit processor, it still has 16 bit registers inside of it, and this includes the Program Counter. At any given time, the processor is addressing 64KB of data, which is split up into 16KB banks. The first bank is always operating system code, then, the next 3 banks can be switched however the programmer wishes, this includes a range of 128 flash pages and 8/3 ram pages. By default, one of the banks is flash, and the other two are the working memory. (Which is where the 24KB comes into play.)

We think, (at least I do) that the main reason that TI cut the extra ram was purely to save money. It was not an attack against the GameBoy emulator because although we found out about the cuts a year or two ago, the actual change in manufacturing happened in 2007, which was long before the emulator.

If you want some better pictures, check out datamath.org (http://www.datamath.org/Album_Graph.htm). They have a good comparison of the 83+ and 84+ here (http://www.datamath.org/Graphing/JPEG_TI-83PLUS.htm#84ASIC).


Quote
I can't get GameBoy games on my calculator, but I did afterall buy it to use for school(my first graphing calculator!)

Actually, calc84maniac released a version that allows you to play gameboy games on the calculators wthout the extra ram, you'll have to look around the site for it, (he might have even put it on ticalc.org). The only problem though is that some games, like pokemon, have an extra 32KB of memory in the cartridge, and since the calculators only have 48KB of memory, I think you can see the problem.


Edit (to your ninja):
   Flash memory cannot be used efficiently as ram because it can only be erased 64KB at a time. You can write as many 0's to it as you want, but to write a 1 requires a full sector reset. It is also very slow, a full sector program takes about 3 seconds.

Edit 2:
   After a bit of googling, I think the smaller chip you found is our beloved crystal. This thing runs the internal clock as well as a set of super precise timers that are available to assembly programmers. This description fits since that chip only appears to have 2 leads.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: ralphdspam on September 20, 2011, 09:27:03 pm
Edit 2:
   After a bit of googling, I think the smaller chip you found is our beloved crystal. This thing runs the internal clock as well as a set of super precise timers that are available to assembly programmers. This description fits since that chip only appears to have 2 leads.
Woa!  So we can (with a little more research) overclock the 84 Plus SE now?  

8 KB - Reserved for OS usage.  I believe these are addresses 0000h to 8000h on Page 0.
Can I use this ram for rst hijacks in cpu-intensive programs, such as emulators?  (Of course, I won't be able to use bcalls.)
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: ztrumpet on September 20, 2011, 09:29:46 pm
Can I use this ram for rst hijacks in cpu-intensive programs, such as emulators?  (Of course, I won't be able to use bcalls.)
Yes, but you must make sure to back it up somewhere.  I'd recommend talking to calc84maniac about doing this - he is the only person I've heard of doing so, and he does it with his more recent versions of his GameBoy emulator.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: calc84maniac on September 20, 2011, 09:31:29 pm
Uhh... I don't know where that 8KB of RAM at $0000-$8000 came from :P
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: ralphdspam on September 20, 2011, 09:32:56 pm
Uhh... I don't know where that 8KB of RAM at $0000-$8000 came from :P
What?
EDIT: Got my hopes up.  :'(
I should learn how to be more skeptical. 
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: ztrumpet on September 20, 2011, 09:41:51 pm
Uhh... I don't know where that 8KB of RAM at $0000-$8000 came from :P
Whoops, my bad.  Hopefully this sets the situation straight:

Quote from: #omnimaga
[19:31:57] <+OmnomIRC> (O)<ztrumpet> calc84
[19:32:06] <+OmnomIRC> (O)<ztrumpet> Am I missing something?
[19:32:39] <+OmnomIRC> (O)<calc84maniac> $0000-$3FFF is always ROM page 0
[19:33:04] <+OmnomIRC> (O)<ztrumpet> Let's see, what did I confuse here?
[19:33:23] <+OmnomIRC> (O)<ztrumpet> What is at 0000 to 8000 then?
[19:33:26] <+OmnomIRC> (O)<calc84maniac> there's $8000-$9D94 which is OS stuffs
[19:33:49] <+OmnomIRC> (O)<calc84maniac> (plus some of that is saferam)
[19:33:54] <+OmnomIRC> (O)<ztrumpet> right
[19:34:04] <+OmnomIRC> (O)<ztrumpet> what's 0000 to 8000?
[19:34:16] <+OmnomIRC> (O)<calc84maniac> normally, it's ROM
[19:34:26] <+OmnomIRC> (O)<ztrumpet> Oh
[19:34:31] <+OmnomIRC> (O)<ralphdspam> can you switch ram into it?
[19:34:32] <+OmnomIRC> (O)<ztrumpet> That's one of the banks?
[19:34:40] <+OmnomIRC> (O)<calc84maniac> two
[19:34:46] <+OmnomIRC> (O)<ztrumpet> Wow, I feel really stupid now. :P
[19:34:54] <+Runer112> 0000 to 3FFF is always ROM 0
[19:35:00] <+Runer112> so you can't switch RAM into there
[19:35:20] <+OmnomIRC> (O)<ztrumpet> Then 4000 to 7FFF is another bank?
[19:35:22] <+OmnomIRC> (O)<calc84maniac> and you can switch RAM into 4000-7FFF, but only on certain models
[19:35:29] <+OmnomIRC> (O)<ztrumpet> What is there normally?
[19:35:45] <+Runer112> there isn;t specifically a normal page there
[19:35:51] <+Runer112> well
[19:35:54] <+Runer112> I guess there technically is
[19:35:56] <+OmnomIRC> (O)<calc84maniac> swapping ram there doesn't work on TI-83+BE or TI-84 Pocket.fr
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: Billeekid on September 21, 2011, 06:27:30 pm
"beloved crystal" what would that mean? I have RC cars in mind,lol.
   So the calculators are 16 bit, I'm assuming that is necessary for more advanced calculations and memory sizes? I'm still studying the 8-bit principle  :P  but I'm failing to understand what issues arise with reprogramming the flash memory. I've always been told that my flash drive will eventually go corrupt from use, but after the flash memory is reprogrammed, won't the remaining memory function as RAM with out any future corruption?  Can you partition the flash memory!?   Well, now I'm gonna have to find this bespoke "low memory" GB emulator, I am a little bit excited to play Links's Awakening.  :)
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: Runer112 on September 21, 2011, 06:40:19 pm
Technically the calculators have an 8-bit processor, as they have an instruction word size of 8 bits and the general use registers are each 8 bits. But that's not really important.

Regarding reprogramming Flash memory: In normal operation, writing to Flash can only be done by the operating system. However, even if this protection is disabled, you can't really use Flash memory as RAM. This is because you can't set bits in Flash by writing data normally, you can only reset bits. The only way to set bits is to order a sector erase, which destroys all data in a 64-kilobyte sector by setting all the bits in that sector. So if you wrote 0 to a byte in Flash memory, that byte could no longer hold anything except a 0 until you order a full sector erase.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: thepenguin77 on September 21, 2011, 06:47:37 pm
"beloved crystal" what would that mean? I have RC cars in mind,lol.

The crystal is a 32,768 Hz timer that can be utilized by assembly programmers. Internally, there are a whole bunch of scalers that let you access a very accurate frequencies with which you can do whatever you want. One of the best things about the timers though is that they will generate an interrupt when they expire, here are some things that the crystal timers have been used for.


And without the crystal timers, none of this would be possible, or at least as accurate.

Quote
   So the calculators are 16 bit, I'm assuming that is necessary for more advanced calculations and memory sizes? I'm still studying the 8-bit principle  :P  but I'm failing to understand what issues arise with reprogramming the flash memory. I've always been told that my flash drive will eventually go corrupt from use, but after the flash memory is reprogrammed, won't the remaining memory function as RAM with out any future corruption?  Can you partition the flash memory!?   Well, now I'm gonna have to find this bespoke "low memory" GB emulator, I am a little bit excited to play Links's Awakening.  :)

Well, the flash memory actually is partitioned already. The problem is that it is partitioned in 64KB chunks which is a hardware requirement. Your flash drive probably is partitioned into 512 byte chunks which are easy to work with. And like I said, the reason it can't be effectively used as ram is because it is essentially a one time write.

A good way to look at flash would be to compare it to an etch-a-sketch. When you first start out, the entire thing is blank, then you draw you picture and you're happy with it. But lets say you make a mistake and you want to erase it, you can't. Instead, you have to shake the etch-a-sketch and clear the whole screen. This is exactly how the flash on the calculator works.

64KB chunks are huge in calculator land, 64KB is the maximum size the processor can even address, so erasing a sector of that size is not something to take lightly, especially because it takes 2 seconds. It's because of the way that flash works that we can't use is as ram. Using flash as ram isn't practical because once you write a value, it's there for good, and the only way to write another is to find some free space, which would be after your data. Then, you would just keep this up until you run out of space, at which point you have to format the entire thing and start over.
Title: Re: The Missing 84+ Extra RAM Pages (hardware change)
Post by: Billeekid on September 21, 2011, 06:54:29 pm
Technically the calculators have an 8-bit processor, as they have an instruction word size of 8 bits and the general use registers are each 8 bits. But that's not really important.

Regarding reprogramming Flash memory: In normal operation, writing to Flash can only be done by the operating system. However, even if this protection is disabled, you can't really use Flash memory as RAM. This is because you can't set bits in Flash by writing data normally, you can only reset bits. The only way to set bits is to order a sector erase, which destroys all data in a 64-kilobyte sector by setting all the bits in that sector. So if you wrote 0 to a byte in Flash memory, that byte could no longer hold anything except a 0 until you order a full sector erase.
  Sounds like I need to do a bit more research on my own, this comment sounds very technical, but some of the other replies I've read sound much to broad.  Runner112 what can I myself conclude from your reply, I apologize but right now I have no idea how to interpret this reply.  Also why did you state "Technically the calculators are 8-bit"  I could say the same for my computer, since it's operating system is also based on the 8-bit principle, I was only confused by this part of your reply.   The etch-a-sketch analogy is easier to understand.

Is the crystal comparable in function to any major component on a PC mobo?  Also wouldn't you need to use a different battery/powersource to overclock without stability issues?  Someone said something about overclocking.