Whatever became of the "Sweet-16?"

[+Larry]

The Sweet-16 I'm referring to is the 65816 replacement cpu that was sold briefly.

 

Here's what I think I remember:

 

It was sold briefly, and generally worked, but had some issues in some computers.

It was supposedly quite simple (and not much bigger than the dip-40 IC).

It was primarily developed by someone other than FTE.

It needed some additional work, but AFAIK, the project died.

No details ever released (that I am aware of).

 

What's right; what's wrong, what's missing in the above? Why did it die?

 

65816's are cheap and readily available. This seems like a logical and pretty straight-forward improvement for our machines.

 

-Larry

[ndary]

maybe this link will be helpful: http://hardware.atari8.info/65816.php

 

ndary

[peteym5]

The Sweet-16 I'm referring to is the 65816 replacement cpu that was sold briefly.

 

Here's what I think I remember:

 

It was sold briefly, and generally worked, but had some issues in some computers.

It was supposedly quite simple (and not much bigger than the dip-40 IC).

It was primarily developed by someone other than FTE.

It needed some additional work, but AFAIK, the project died.

No details ever released (that I am aware of).

 

What's right; what's wrong, what's missing in the above? Why did it die?

 

65816's are cheap and readily available. This seems like a logical and pretty straight-forward improvement for our machines.

 

-Larry

 

I think the reason why Sweet16 did not gain much momentum on the Atari is that it required 32 bytes of page 0 to be used differently and it probably could not be used with like Basic. However now with several 65816 projects along the way, using 16bit integer math can now be done, but not quite the same thing that was done with sweet 16. If new high level programming languages are completed with a 65816cpu, I would like to see 16bit variables as an alternative to using the 6byte binary coded decimal variables.

[joeventura]

maybe this link will be helpful: http://hardware.atari8.info/65816.php

 

ndary

 

 

It will be helpful as soon as someone translates it to english.

[+bob1200xl]

The Sweet-16 I'm referring to is the 65816 replacement cpu that was sold briefly.

 

Here's what I think I remember:

 

It was sold briefly, and generally worked, but had some issues in some computers.

It was supposedly quite simple (and not much bigger than the dip-40 IC).

It was primarily developed by someone other than FTE.

It needed some additional work, but AFAIK, the project died.

No details ever released (that I am aware of).

 

What's right; what's wrong, what's missing in the above? Why did it die?

 

65816's are cheap and readily available. This seems like a logical and pretty straight-forward improvement for our machines.

 

-Larry

 

Sweet Sixteen is fairly simple, like a couple of gates and the 65816. The clocks need to be skewed properly in order for it to be stable in all Atari 8-bits, but it works well in most machines. The 65816 in native mode is identical to the 6502. Same number of execution cycles, same bugs, even. (resolving branch addresses accross page boundaries doesn't work right, just like a 6502. The 65802 is NOT identical) The upgrade doesn't do anything to improve the operation of the 8-bit; it just allows you to play with 65816 coding.

 

Yes, it's a drop-in. Why? Do you want one?

 

Bob

[+Larry]

The Sweet-16 I'm referring to is the 65816 replacement cpu that was sold briefly.

 

Here's what I think I remember:

 

It was sold briefly, and generally worked, but had some issues in some computers.

It was supposedly quite simple (and not much bigger than the dip-40 IC).

It was primarily developed by someone other than FTE.

It needed some additional work, but AFAIK, the project died.

No details ever released (that I am aware of).

 

What's right; what's wrong, what's missing in the above? Why did it die?

 

65816's are cheap and readily available. This seems like a logical and pretty straight-forward improvement for our machines.

 

-Larry

 

Sweet Sixteen is fairly simple, like a couple of gates and the 65816. The clocks need to be skewed properly in order for it to be stable in all Atari 8-bits, but it works well in most machines. The 65816 in native mode is identical to the 6502. Same number of execution cycles, same bugs, even. (resolving branch addresses accross page boundaries doesn't work right, just like a 6502. The 65802 is NOT identical) The upgrade doesn't do anything to improve the operation of the 8-bit; it just allows you to play with 65816 coding.

 

Yes, it's a drop-in. Why? Do you want one?

 

Bob

 

Yes, I'd like one, or even just the plan/schematic to build one.

 

Do you know of any reason that it would not work with the 65816 OS (http://drac030.krap.pl/en-specyfikacja.php)? Or for that matter, the Turbo-816 OS?

 

I'm not asking if it will work, just do you know of any reason that it may not.

 

Thanks,

Larry

[+bob1200xl]

The Sweet-16 I'm referring to is the 65816 replacement cpu that was sold briefly.

 

Here's what I think I remember:

 

It was sold briefly, and generally worked, but had some issues in some computers.

It was supposedly quite simple (and not much bigger than the dip-40 IC).

It was primarily developed by someone other than FTE.

It needed some additional work, but AFAIK, the project died.

No details ever released (that I am aware of).

 

What's right; what's wrong, what's missing in the above? Why did it die?

 

65816's are cheap and readily available. This seems like a logical and pretty straight-forward improvement for our machines.

 

-Larry

 

Sweet Sixteen is fairly simple, like a couple of gates and the 65816. The clocks need to be skewed properly in order for it to be stable in all Atari 8-bits, but it works well in most machines. The 65816 in native mode is identical to the 6502. Same number of execution cycles, same bugs, even. (resolving branch addresses accross page boundaries doesn't work right, just like a 6502. The 65802 is NOT identical) The upgrade doesn't do anything to improve the operation of the 8-bit; it just allows you to play with 65816 coding.

 

Yes, it's a drop-in. Why? Do you want one?

 

Bob

 

Yes, I'd like one, or even just the plan/schematic to build one.

 

Do you know of any reason that it would not work with the 65816 OS (http://drac030.krap.pl/en-specyfikacja.php)? Or for that matter, the Turbo-816 OS?

 

I'm not asking if it will work, just do you know of any reason that it may not.

 

Thanks,

Larry

 

 

The Turbo-816 had a bunch of additional logic and memory, I think. That may be a problem. The Polish 65816 is pretty much the same as Sweet Sixteen so the OS will probably work OK.

 

PM me.

 

Bob

[Kyle22]

The Sweet-16 I'm referring to is the 65816 replacement cpu that was sold briefly.

 

Here's what I think I remember:

 

It was sold briefly, and generally worked, but had some issues in some computers.

It was supposedly quite simple (and not much bigger than the dip-40 IC).

It was primarily developed by someone other than FTE.

It needed some additional work, but AFAIK, the project died.

No details ever released (that I am aware of).

 

What's right; what's wrong, what's missing in the above? Why did it die?

 

65816's are cheap and readily available. This seems like a logical and pretty straight-forward improvement for our machines.

 

-Larry

Yeah, this is a NecroQuote, but I just saw this

 

Who do you think "primarily developed" it?

 

It was ME who stayed up one night working on code for the GAL on the Sweet-16.

 

I made the first working version of it.

[lemiel]

Drac030 has got and used one, maybe still is in his machine, and probably his OS was written using it. We have to wait maybe he can give us more info.

[Gunstar]

This is the same "sweet-16" that was published about in Atari Classics magazine back in the early 90's? If so, it used a GAL chip way back then? I didn't recall that. My first experience with GAL's and other more sophisticated types (forget what they were called now) was in 2000-2002 time frame while I was taking electronics at MATC Madison Wisconsin. I didn't know they existed in the early 90s...but then that's when I was attending a normal 4-year liberal arts college and partying and not doing anything with electronics except typing term papers on my 130XE and playing AVP and Doom on my shiny new Atari Jaguar. I spent all my book money for a semester on the Jaguar and games and just always studied with my girl friends books!

 

I wanted one ever since the early 90's, but was a poor college student at the time, and I forgot about it until this century and couldn't find anything about it in the early days of Atari Age, so I just sort of forgot about 65816 upgrades until the Rapidus showed up. But at this point, wouldn't the Rapidus be a better alternative anyway? I was planning on upgrading one of my 1200XL's soon with it and a VBXE.

 

I guess I also missed this thread back in 2007, though I was active on the forum then...I spent way too much time in the Jaguar forum back then though, until I finally got fed up with some of the Jaguar community trolls, haven't visited that part of Atari Age for several years now.

Edited January 23, 2018 by Gunstar

[mutterminder]

I've got one installed in one of my 800XL's that I got back in the day from FTe. It turned out that nothing much came of it. I got a modified Assembler with it that does 65816 code but I never did anything with it. The Sweet 16 just seemed to make my 800XL less compatible with alot of existing code.

[Gunstar]

My plans/hopes for a 65816 upgrade is merely to run some software faster, like Rescue On Fractalus video clips running on the Rapidus. I really just want to speed up all those vintage wire-frame vector games like Flight Simulator, F-15, Tomahawk, Mercenary, etc. and hopefully be able to choose the fast mode or the usual 1.79Mhz for compatibility with everything else. If the 65816 boards can't do that for me, I'm not interested. I need to do more research, but I've seen RoF and some of the 3D polygonal/vector demos running fast and quite well on the Rapidus. I don't care about coding or new material if I could just have that stuff.

[+slx]

My plans/hopes for a 65816 upgrade is merely to run some software faster, like Rescue On Fractalus video clips running on the Rapidus. I really just want to speed up all those vintage wire-frame vector games like Flight Simulator, F-15, Tomahawk, Mercenary, etc. and hopefully be able to choose the fast mode or the usual 1.79Mhz for compatibility with everything else. If the 65816 boards can't do that for me, I'm not interested. I need to do more research, but I've seen RoF and some of the 3D polygonal/vector demos running fast and quite well on the Rapidus. I don't care about coding or new material if I could just have that stuff.

The only way to make them faster with a Sweet16 or Antonia would be a re-write using 65816 commands that are more efficient, I suppose.