CPS 1.5
-
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2020 12:33 pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: CPS 1.5
I bought my board in September 2020, it’s a black board, v2.5, never had issues with other cores beside CPS1.5.
Re: CPS 1.5
Re: CPS 1.5
Other games like Punisher i could play all way through, Cadillacs and Dinosaurs i got up to round 8 before i had to turn it off so i couldn't get to complete it, the whole run was smooth though.
I've assembled my own 128MB module with 2 AS4C32M16SB-6TIN memory chips on the board.
Re: CPS 1.5
For those who are not having problem with 128mb sdram and can do the following test:
Load some game of cps1 and as soon as the first image appears load the cadillac and dinossaur and leave in attract mode until you reach the forest stage where the three descend from the car until they pass through a tree, see if they pass this part without giving error
-
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2020 12:33 pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: CPS 1.5
This is what I did:patamar4 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 3:03 am Load some game of cps1 and as soon as the first image appears load the cadillac and dinossaur and leave in attract mode until you reach the forest stage where the three descend from the car until they pass through a tree, see if they pass this part without giving error
1) Put the plug and turn on the MISTer
2) Arcade -> C&D (World) -> attract mode until the point you mentioned -> no issues
3) Fast Reboot (not the cold one) from the GUI
4) Arcade -> Alternatives -> SFZero CPS1.5 (the one that gave me problems) -> attract mode for 2 minutes -> no issues
5) Started the game with Ryu vs Birdie, Ryu vs Rose, Ryu vs Adon -> no issues
6) Fast Reboot -> C&D (World) again -> Attract mode for 10 minutes -> no issues
7) Fast Reboot -> SFZero CPS1.5 again -> Attract mode for like 2 minutes -> ADDRESS ERROR - ADDRESS: 00023B64
It's totally random, few days ago I could not start a single round of SFZero. I only think that it doesn't happen right after you boot the MISTer.
BTW it seems to run really hot (I got only an heatsink and no case right now), is this a hint that Jotego is "pushing the limits"?
Re: CPS 1.5
i have been waiting for the CPS2 core and watching/refreshing jotego's twitter/patreon page everyday looking for progress
i am doubtful CPS2 will be released tomorrow (but a christmas miracle could always happen).
i would guess at this point, we will see CPS2 at the end of January-ish.
-------------------
i have been lucky and not run into any memory issues with my 128 module, and i have not had any address errors when i run CPS1.5 games.
i am using a v2.5 128 RAM module bought ~12 months ago from a seller on the atari forums.
i know @patamar4 has done the 10uf cap mod mentioned by jotego and would be interested if they can run the test suggested above, after the mister has been running for a couple hours.
the cap mod is very easy to do if you have a soldering iron and a spare 10uf cap laying around, so im glad it will not be too big of a deal for people that are getting the errors with their modules.
perhaps jotego can create a workaround in his programming for his CPS1.5 core and his CPS2 core,
but i would guess jotego doesn't want to remake his RAM controller and re-write a ton of code to facilitate for 128 RAM modules that are supposed to function how he was expecting. jotego has said he has ten different 128 modules that hes tested with his cores and 2 of them have voltage variance in their capacitance that is setting off the memory errors.
he has also shown that when he added a 10uf capacitor in parallel to another 10uf cap on a "faulty" 128 module, this corrected the voltage variance and he was no longer getting the errors from before the mod.
v2.4/v2.5 cap layout
top row: 10uf, 0.1uf, 10uf, 0.1uf
bottom row: 10uf, 1uf, 1uf, 10uf, 10uf, 1uf, 1uf, 10uf
(please note the polarity of the 10uf cap you're using before soldering)
-
- Core Developer
- Posts: 534
- Joined: Sun May 24, 2020 9:30 pm
- Has thanked: 19 times
- Been thanked: 141 times
Re: CPS 1.5
I wouldn't characterize it like that - the modules were never designed or produced with that access method in mind (they were designed to support certain speeds with the existing SDRAM controller code), so the phrase "supposed to function how he was expecting" does not ring true.PikWik wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 6:58 pm perhaps jotego can create a workaround in his programming for his CPS1.5 core and his CPS2 core,
but i would guess jotego doesnt want to remake his RAM controller and re-write a ton of code to facilitate for 128 RAM modules that are supposed to function how he was expecting. jotego has said he has ten different 128 modules that hes tested with his cores and 2 of them have voltage variance in their capacitance that is setting off the memory errors.
he has also shown that when he added a 10uf capacitor in parallel to another 10uf cap on a "faulty" 128 module, this corrected the voltage variance and he was no longer getting the errors from before the mod.
(please note the polarity of the 10uf cap youre using before soldering)
He can relax the timings, and I understand that he intends to do so, so that the cores will work with existing hardware.
It should be noted that the following day, he wasn't able to elicit the error on any of the modules with the RBF which had shown them prior (based on conversation from his discord), so consider this an ongoing area of investigation.
Everybody should just calm down a bit, and refrain using language implying blame or fault.
Re: CPS 1.5
i dont mean to put blame or point fingers at all.
im just compiling things ive read/seen about this topic.
i am hopeful jotego will work some magic with CPS1.5/CPS2 (downclock to 64mhz and simultaneously increase data throughput) and all will be well.
at that point, no one will need to mod anything and people that are selling 128 RAM modules can rest easy knowing they dont have to re-purchase 30 new pieces for their webstore.
Re: CPS 1.5
I consider that a part of the problems is not due to ram but in mistakes with the arcade directory and the way to use it, i've made this experience, i thougt it was my ram modules but in fact a simple "blind" mra file that couldn't find the sfz 1.5 rom properly.
Re: CPS 1.5
Chris23235 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 22, 2020 10:45 pm Had the same problem after running the Update All script. Downloaded the mra files from Jotego's repository and they fixed the problem.
Worked a treat!
Thank you
Re: CPS 1.5
I have128MB ram module from https://misterfpga.co.uk and the latest update now makes Punisher and C&D both pop-up with address errors where before they worked fine :/ I think Jotego said he's done messing with it too fuuuuuu
Re: CPS 1.5
Vespa wrote: ↑Fri Jan 08, 2021 10:46 pmI have128MB ram module from https://misterfpga.co.uk and the latest update now makes Punisher and C&D both pop-up with address errors where before they worked fine :/ I think Jotego said he's done messing with it too fuuuuuu
Send it back and ask for a replacement. Ricardo, Pork and Zerohimself have already said they will replace if people have issues with their RAMs.
- Nat
- Posts: 125
- Joined: Sun May 24, 2020 7:28 pm
- Location: United Kingdom
- Has thanked: 8 times
- Been thanked: 70 times
- Contact:
Re: CPS 1.5
Sorry to hear your now having issues with Jotego's latest build, if you are one of my customers with a v2.5 128MB SDRAM module and having issues, just contact me. I will rework or exchange your SDRAM module.
https://MiSTerFPGA.co.uk/
Re: CPS 1.5
Nat wrote: ↑Sat Jan 09, 2021 12:27 pmSorry to hear your now having issues with Jotego's latest build, if you are one of my customers with a v2.5 128MB SDRAM module and having issues, just contact me. I will rework or exchange your SDRAM module.
Hey Nat, good to see you here! I just wanted to check if I was on the latest build (appears I am) and redo the RAM test. So I get no Red screen and there's no sound but the OSD led will flash once every 30 seconds, not sure if this counts as 'blinking' and therefore a fail?
Do you think it's best to wait for the CPS2 beta core to drop before exchanging the RAM? Save faffing around again if there's some unforeseen issue with that.
- lamarax
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 472
- Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 6:28 pm
- Has thanked: 33 times
- Been thanked: 199 times
Re: CPS 1.5
Jotego should examine his proprietary SDRAM controller more closely, instead of issuing "tests" left and right.
Re: CPS 1.5
I believe you are wrong. Also JT has mentioned he will go back to core development from this week.lamarax wrote: ↑Sat Jan 09, 2021 8:14 pm There's already a new v3.0 board in production (a cooperation between Sorgelig and Ricardo), but frankly, I don't believe it's needed for the time being and with what we have.
Jotego should examine his proprietary SDRAM controller more closely, instead of issuing "tests" left and right.
- Chris23235
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 842
- Joined: Sun May 24, 2020 8:45 pm
- Has thanked: 106 times
- Been thanked: 167 times
Re: CPS 1.5
There were always unexplainable issues with certain SDRAM modules in several cores (e.g. the bug in FF VI were the game glitched for some people). All solutions were try and error workarounds. Jotego was the first one to come up with findings that could be reproduced and an explanation for these findings and the best of all a possible solution.lamarax wrote: ↑Sat Jan 09, 2021 8:14 pm There's already a new v3.0 board in production (a cooperation between Sorgelig and Ricardo), but frankly, I don't believe it's needed for the time being and with what we have.
Jotego should examine his proprietary SDRAM controller more closely, instead of issuing "tests" left and right.
So maybe you shouldn't tell him what to do and what not to do. If you are happy with your current SDRAM module this is fine, you are free to ignore Jotego's hard work on the issue. Just don't tell other people how they should do their work which they share with the community for free.
Re: CPS 1.5
It looks like quite a tedious process not to mention time and costs that are involved with making things that get basically given away at little to no cost?
- lamarax
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 472
- Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 6:28 pm
- Has thanked: 33 times
- Been thanked: 199 times
Re: CPS 1.5
I admire Jotego's work and I'm grateful for everything he's been achieving to our collective benefit and enjoyment. I'm also equally -if not more- grateful to Sorgelig for what he has established. My knowledge and skills are way inferior to Jotego's; maybe that's why I've become frustrated with this whole issue forcing him to retrogress. I'm as hyped for what he has in store for us next as anyone really.Chris23235 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 10, 2021 12:44 pm So maybe you shouldn't tell him what to do and what not to do. If you are happy with your current SDRAM module this is fine, you are free to ignore Jotego's hard work on the issue. Just don't tell other people how they should do their work which they share with the community for free.
I'm sorry that my post came off in such an obnoxious and abrasive tone^; it wasn't meant to.
-
- Posts: 121
- Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2020 11:25 am
- Has thanked: 48 times
- Been thanked: 19 times
Re: CPS 1.5
Why not? Jotego is perfectly aware of that issue and he will fix it eventually. Just be patient.
- aberu
- Core Developer
- Posts: 1144
- Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2020 8:34 pm
- Location: Longmont, CO
- Has thanked: 244 times
- Been thanked: 388 times
- Contact:
Re: CPS 1.5
Because the devs for the MiSTer FPGA cores don't work for you and aren't providing a consumer product. They are hobbyists. He wants to work on CPS2, and he will likely get back to SNSM later. He has an IRL job already, and a real life, like pretty much every single FPGA core dev in this space, so developing these cores and sharing them with us is kind of a favor.
Don't get upset or entitled please. It harms the community and increases the chances of burning out all the devs that work hard on these cores.
Re: CPS 1.5
If you want it fixed, i'd suggest diving into some reading material and help these devs by offloading these things from them as the way you're talking about it make it seem trivial to fix at best?
-
- Posts: 72
- Joined: Mon May 25, 2020 8:41 am
- Has thanked: 75 times
- Been thanked: 13 times
- Contact: