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...)

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? . . .

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.

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...

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.

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:
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