Post by: InvidiousDemise on December 04, 2011, 10:31:00 PM
Post by: SNAAAKE on December 05, 2011, 12:50:00 AM
meh not buying. my slim loads fines..takes 5 something seconds maybe..I used keyner wrapping wire and not the wires come with tx coolrunner.
Post by: Exobex on December 05, 2011, 04:08:00 AM
QUOTE(Blargharg @ Dec 5 2011, 05:53 AM) 
I really don't understand why this can't be done with a few resistors. I mean seriously, what is the logic here? What's the science behind this? Or is it just trial and error, throw shit at the wall and see what sticks type of thing? Also, while I'm perfectly happy to pay 5$ for a QSB that saves me time on install & is reusable for future dumps/writes, I'd much rather stick with the 50cm wire than pay another 4 bucks for this.. this thing.
It's not down to resistance, it's down to timing, namely the time it takes for the signal to travel down half a metre of wire. Look at any modern motherboard and you'll see bus tracks wiggling, it's done to ensure all the tracks of the bus are the same length and the bits therefore arrive simultaneously.
Half a metre of wire will do the job just as well, but ideally will need to be tacked in place in a location where it's not going to interfere with or pick up interference from other tracks. The fact that the wire on this new PCB zigzags ought to help in that respect as well, coil it and it becomes an inductor. This is a neater way to pack in a 50cm wire that's going to stay put without needing to be glued in place.
QUOTE(SNAAAKE @ Dec 5 2011, 07:50 AM)
shouldn't it already come with the tx coolrunner...
Definitely.
Post by: BoNg420 on December 05, 2011, 06:49:00 AM
QUOTE(col12 @ Dec 5 2011, 08:17 AM)
tell you what executer everyone that bought a coolrunner send them one for free so the device ie coolrunner works as it should. starting to get like m$ greedy
the cool runner has been out in the wild for a while now we have had lots of feed back from testers NOT MEAN LOYAL CUSTOMERS .we have made a product that will make the product you bought from us work
Oh come on now, you paid $20 + sh to be a beta tester!
Post by: LordX on December 05, 2011, 06:53:00 AM
many solder pads for deferent size , why not to use 1 pad for a wire and jumpers ?! even solder jumpers.
and why not to found away to fix the CPU_RST in the first place and make it more stable without all this lame tricks.
Post by: Blackaddr on December 05, 2011, 08:29:00 AM
If you install your CPLD board right next to the CPU_RST point, and keep the wire under 1" there shouldn't be any interference on that signal. Why does everyone insist on putting it on top of the AVIP? Sure it's easy, but you're giving yourself bigger headaches.
If you try different timing values in the CPLD you can also optimize the timing for your particular console. Why spends days playing with wire lengths, spend an afternoon to learn to compile you own JED.
50 cm wires with loops? Come on, KISS.
Post by: ninja x on December 05, 2011, 08:45:00 AM
kinda pisses me off - but that's the name of the game with technology. everyone is in a hurry to be the first out to make a sell - then they take their time to improve the product progressively.
Post by: shtewps on December 05, 2011, 10:28:00 AM
You need this to improve your coolrunner, now come out with something to improve this BEFORE people buy it.
(agreed it should come bundled with kits -- resellers should be offering this item at cost for customers who have already purchased a CR)
Post by: xiaNaix on December 05, 2011, 11:40:00 AM
QUOTE(SNAAAKE @ Dec 5 2011, 02:50 AM)
shouldn't it already come with the tx coolrunner...
meh not buying. my slim loads fines..takes 5 something seconds maybe..I used keyner wrapping wire and not the wires come with tx coolrunner.
if its included - what a complete waste of time and money for those that buy a coolrunner who are going to mod a phat
some of you need to think before typing
and if yours is booting in 5 seconds - then why would you even consider getting this ? You wouldn't.
Its also nothing to do with the wire you use. The impedance of that wire supplied with the coolrunner is the same as kynar
This seems like a great addon to make the job even easier than before. You dont want it ? keep your $3.95 and dont buy it. simple.
Post by: xiaNaix on December 05, 2011, 12:33:00 PM
QUOTE(shtewps @ Dec 5 2011, 12:28 PM)
Jesus.. add a f*cking switch FFS. Not 50 pads to constantly move your wires to while testing.
You need this to improve your coolrunner, now come out with something to improve this BEFORE people buy it.
(agreed it should come bundled with kits -- resellers should be offering this item at cost for customers who have already purchased a CR)
A switch doesn't work - it plays with the impedance of the line - there was a big discussion about it on IRC. You dont think this stuff is tested while its being made ? So naive.....
And why should free ones be offered ? this is a tool to make a job easier - not to fix something that was broken
All you armchair complainers - why dont you make your own solutions instead of whining like little bitches ?
QUOTE(Blackaddr @ Dec 5 2011, 10:29 AM)
This is getting out of hand with all these silly wire lengths and loops.
If you install your CPLD board right next to the CPU_RST point, and keep the wire under 1" there shouldn't be any interference on that signal. Why does everyone insist on putting it on top of the AVIP? Sure it's easy, but you're giving yourself bigger headaches.
If you try different timing values in the CPLD you can also optimize the timing for your particular console. Why spends days playing with wire lengths, spend an afternoon to learn to compile you own JED.
50 cm wires with loops? Come on, KISS.
Your comment was useless and ill informed about why this is required in the first place
its nothing to do with resistance and everything to do with timing.
if you think its as easy as making your own CPLD code then go for it and share with everyone.......
You have to laugh at some of you - you post like you're technical in any way and that you know more than the engineers who work at places like Xecuter lol
QUOTE(LordX @ Dec 5 2011, 08:53 AM)
Very lame PCB ,
many solder pads for deferent size , why not to use 1 pad for a wire and jumpers ?! even solder jumpers.
and why not to found away to fix the CPU_RST in the first place and make it more stable without all this lame tricks.
Jumpers were tested - as well as switches - they affected the impedance. if you had any clue you'd understand this. Same reason as to why a cable hardness wasn't used on the coolrunner. You don't think all this is tested first ? Similar conversations on IRC about it and you had to laugh at the kids who thought they knew more. the naivety is staggering - but its video games scene - what do you expect?
maybe you should fix the CPU_RST issue in the first place because you are obviously smarter than Tiros who spent over a year designing the hack......
Post by: cornnatron on December 05, 2011, 01:05:00 PM
he was also involved with first jtag i thought
and as far as i know he came up with the Transistor wiring with aud clamp for the first jtag
so more than enough technical knowhow
could you tell me where you helped with the scene or did you just read the irc.
becouse your comming over like a true Xecuter fanboy.
@blackaddr any tips on finding better timings for specific consoles?
Post by: X4life3 on December 05, 2011, 01:17:00 PM
Post by: ruciz on December 05, 2011, 03:03:00 PM
the average joe end user can cut their 50cm wire back 3CM at a time and it will do the EXACT same thing! Against what the diagram says I guess the intentionally extra long wire isn't needed!
TX is admitting that their 50CM long slim wire IS a failure and this (which should really be included with the CoolRunners, esp now that they retail for $13/100) may help? The benefit of this is you quickly swap pads until you find the optimal length - no worries of board damage (then again if you are good at soldering there isn't either!)
If you want- get one of these, test the different lengths, find a suitable one and then remove and install a wire that long. Simple as that. Use the board on another slim to repeat.
Alternatively, cut and coil wires at 50, 47, 44, etc and keep trying until one is suitable.
I just tweaked a slim from usual 80-400 sec boots to under 20 sec every time by shortening their 50CM wire to a 32CM length as suggested by other teams/researchers. This is NOT measured, and is definitely shorter than 32CM but I cut off 3cm of wire at a time, 6 times, trialing between. Once you take into acct stripping, tinning, trimming Im likely at 31CM.. Its possible 29cm may work even better too, but Im satisfied.
I tested the unit 2 ways, which results seem to differ at other lengths.
1- cold boot (unplugged for 15 sec or longer)
2- warm boot (powered down orange light on PSU for 15 sec or longer)
Every time it boots in under 30 seconds now. Nominally 5-15 sec with favor to a 'warm' boot. The odd boot takes 20 sec. I have yet to hit over 30 seconds though with 15 boots. I have read some people get 5 sec 'cold' boots and really long 'warm' boots. If this is the case I suggest swapping from 3V3_STBY to 3V3 point. It will make every boot a cold boot...
Really wish TX would get it together tho. When these released they sucked with slims and jaspers.. After some trials, people figured out that the jaspers are stubborn need a cap. so TX include 68nF capacitor. Now they are admitting their 50CM wire isn't the best plan but rather than include the possible fix - they sell it separately at 20-33% of coolrunner cost.
To those who will shell out $16 to get it after shipping, I sincerely *hope* its worth it... compared to cutting back or getting 3.5M of wire to test all the lengths.
Post by: SNAAAKE on December 05, 2011, 03:29:00 PM
QUOTE(xiaNaix @ Dec 5 2011, 01:40 PM)
if its included - what a complete waste of time and money for those that buy a coolrunner who are going to mod a phat
some of you need to think before typing
and if yours is booting in 5 seconds - then why would you even consider getting this ? You wouldn't.
Its also nothing to do with the wire you use. The impedance of that wire supplied with the coolrunner is the same as kynar
This seems like a great addon to make the job even easier than before. You dont want it ? keep your $3.95 and dont buy it. simple.
how much does a qsb cost? like 10 cents? time...mass produced in factory?
I dont need it for my own slim. but Id like it come with my $20 tx coolrunner package because I am a modder and doing this for people too. I dont wanna pay $20 for a half-assed product. thats why the qsb should come with with coolrunner so I have the FULL complete product so I can install it for my customer's xboxes.
doesnt matter for those of us already bought some tx coolrunner. I am not expecting these qsb for free because I bought some txc already. but for FUTURE orders I am expecting it to come with the qsb.
Post by: Exobex on December 05, 2011, 03:42:00 PM
QUOTE(cornnatron @ Dec 5 2011, 08:05 PM)
Im sorry to say xiaNaix but i think Blackaddr knows what he is talking about
could you tell me where you helped with the scene or did you just read the irc.
becouse your comming over like a true Xecuter fanboy.
If you put xiaNaix into Google you'll find that he was responsible for the PSX-Scene and WiiNewz forums (before they were turned over to Caputo and WiiNewz turned to shit, but that's another story). He's not new to the scene, far from it.
Me, before you ask? Only a few bits and bobs made out of personal necessity and released to the public (Freelock, the 0.7 revision of raincoat, X360SAM).
You?
Post by: Ranger72 on December 05, 2011, 05:01:00 PM
There are some Slims out there that are much more picky than others. For those this device would come in handy.
Post by: shtewps on December 05, 2011, 07:56:00 PM
Were not talking about a test lab here you dumb sh*t (since you want to start name calling). Were talking about running a business and offering quality product to a consumer market.
You want to talk about testing, eh? Really? I bet your definition of 'testing' fits nicely with that of TX. Let's sell these "bitches" a product, let them do the leg work, and capitalize off their findings. Because it only took them an extra 3 months of "testing" to come out with a kit that wasn't complete. And this is not even mentioning BB jaspers that require a cap.
Oh f*ck yeah bud, so much "testing" going on here.
Please, do everyone a favour and don't associate yourself with the business world. Pathetic child.
QUOTE(xiaNaix @ Dec 5 2011, 03:33 PM)
You dont think this stuff is tested while its being made ? So naive.....
Post by: Blackaddr on December 05, 2011, 08:03:00 PM
QUOTE(pif001 @ Dec 5 2011, 08:29 PM)
Please share a tutorial about optimizing our own JED files... and ignore that troll please!
Before you get into exotic ideas like long loops of cables, a ton of different cap values, give yourself the best chance at success first, then move on to more complex ideas. Put the CPLD board as close to the CPU_RST as you can reasonably get it, atleast for initial testing. You can always move it to a more convenient location later once you've established boot times with a very short wire. Then you know what the real impact is.
As for changing the source code, Gligli posted all his source code to build your own JED on github. Try to compile his source code as-is using the free ISE Webpack tools (you can probably find general tutorials and guides on using ISE on the web, and ask around for help). Make sure you can compile the unaltered code, program the CPLD and it still works. This proves you're compiling correctly. Just learning this part will be the hardest, but it's worthwhile.
Then, find the following line in slim.vhd:
constant WIDTH_RESET_START : integer := 17357;
That's the one you will change.
Try changing the value from 17357 to 17358. See if it still works, does it work better? Try 17356, same thing, does it still work, is it any more reliable?
It probably sounds like a pain to have to change the code, recompile, reprogram and test. But If 17357 isn't already optimal for your console, then the best value will be very close, like, +/1 or +/- 2 at the most, so you really don't need to try many different values.
Post by: shtewps on December 05, 2011, 08:25:00 PM
QUOTE(Blackaddr @ Dec 5 2011, 11:03 PM)
Before you get into exotic ideas like long loops of cables, a ton of different cap values, give yourself the best chance at success first, then move on to more complex ideas. Put the CPLD board as close to the CPU_RST as you can reasonably get it, atleast for initial testing. You can always move it to a more convenient location later once you've established boot times with a very short wire. Then you know what the real impact is.
As for changing the source code, Gligli posted all his source code to build your own JED on github. Try to compile his source code as-is using the free ISE Webpack tools (you can probably find general tutorials and guides on using ISE on the web, and ask around for help). Make sure you can compile the unaltered code, program the CPLD and it still works. This proves you're compiling correctly. Just learning this part will be the hardest, but it's worthwhile.
Then, find the following line in slim.vhd:
constant WIDTH_RESET_START : integer := 17357;
That's the one you will change.
Try changing the value from 17357 to 17358. See if it still works, does it work better? Try 17356, same thing, does it still work, is it any more reliable?
It probably sounds like a pain to have to change the code, recompile, reprogram and test. But If 17357 isn't already optimal for your console, then the best value will be very close, like, +/1 or +/- 2 at the most, so you really don't need to try many different values.
Post by: ruciz on December 05, 2011, 09:25:00 PM
QUOTE(Ranger72 @ Dec 6 2011, 01:01 AM)
This would have saved me about 10 hours of try and error on my first Slim. I would get the wire length just right and spooled around under the board just right to get it to boot under 5 seconds only to have it to all to shit when I put it back into the cage and have to mess with the wire length again.
There are some Slims out there that are much more picky than others. For those this device would come in handy.
Serious? 10 hours to tape wire?
Totally not worth it. save 10 sec on a boot, be 10 years before I would notice that amount of time saving.
QUOTE(Blackaddr @ Dec 6 2011, 04:03 AM)
Before you get into exotic ideas like long loops of cables, a ton of different cap values, give yourself the best chance at success first, then move on to more complex ideas. Put the CPLD board as close to the CPU_RST as you can reasonably get it, atleast for initial testing. You can always move it to a more convenient location later once you've established boot times with a very short wire. Then you know what the real impact is.
As for changing the source code, Gligli posted all his source code to build your own JED on github. Try to compile his source code as-is using the free ISE Webpack tools (you can probably find general tutorials and guides on using ISE on the web, and ask around for help). Make sure you can compile the unaltered code, program the CPLD and it still works. This proves you're compiling correctly. Just learning this part will be the hardest, but it's worthwhile.
Then, find the following line in slim.vhd:
constant WIDTH_RESET_START : integer := 17357;
That's the one you will change.
Try changing the value from 17357 to 17358. See if it still works, does it work better? Try 17356, same thing, does it still work, is it any more reliable?
It probably sounds like a pain to have to change the code, recompile, reprogram and test. But If 17357 isn't already optimal for your console, then the best value will be very close, like, +/1 or +/- 2 at the most, so you really don't need to try many different values.
kudos for this tidbit of information. Its greatly appreciated.
Post by: pif001 on December 06, 2011, 02:53:00 AM
Post by: Tag234 on December 06, 2011, 03:00:00 AM
Thanks for that info Blackaddr
Post by: Exobex on December 06, 2011, 03:18:00 AM
QUOTE(Blackaddr @ Dec 6 2011, 03:03 AM)
Before you get into exotic ideas like long loops of cables, a ton of different cap values, give yourself the best chance at success first, then move on to more complex ideas. Put the CPLD board as close to the CPU_RST as you can reasonably get it, atleast for initial testing. You can always move it to a more convenient location later once you've established boot times with a very short wire. Then you know what the real impact is.
As for changing the source code, Gligli posted all his source code to build your own JED on github. Try to compile his source code as-is using the free ISE Webpack tools (you can probably find general tutorials and guides on using ISE on the web, and ask around for help). Make sure you can compile the unaltered code, program the CPLD and it still works. This proves you're compiling correctly. Just learning this part will be the hardest, but it's worthwhile.
Then, find the following line in slim.vhd:
constant WIDTH_RESET_START : integer := 17357;
That's the one you will change.
Try changing the value from 17357 to 17358. See if it still works, does it work better? Try 17356, same thing, does it still work, is it any more reliable?
It probably sounds like a pain to have to change the code, recompile, reprogram and test. But If 17357 isn't already optimal for your console, then the best value will be very close, like, +/1 or +/- 2 at the most, so you really don't need to try many different values.
I've not meddled with CPLD programming at all, but does this mean that a DIY-even-for-newbies version would be possible? I'm thinking a 4-gang DIP switch on the PCB, which would, for example, allow a range from 17350 to 17365 to be selected, or 17354 to 17341 with a spare switch for something else? Obviously this depends on how the code uses the WIDTH_RESET_START constant gets used wirhin the code, and if there are spare I/O pins available to read the switches.
Post by: cornnatron on December 07, 2011, 04:32:00 AM
Post by: rastiemon on December 07, 2011, 05:56:00 PM
So I can understand peoples frustration if their only box has issues like that one. But so far the coolrunner has given me great boot times on most slims so far. Im hoping the last batch I ordered wasn't an issue also. I am gonna try to glitch another box with the same 2 chips I used on the last and see how that goes.
Post by: rastiemon on December 07, 2011, 07:02:00 PM
Post by: Julets on December 08, 2011, 03:22:00 PM
QUOTE(Blackaddr @ Dec 5 2011, 04:29 PM)
This is getting out of hand with all these silly wire lengths and loops.
If you install your CPLD board right next to the CPU_RST point, and keep the wire under 1" there shouldn't be any interference on that signal. Why does everyone insist on putting it on top of the AVIP? Sure it's easy, but you're giving yourself bigger headaches.
If you try different timing values in the CPLD you can also optimize the timing for your particular console. Why spends days playing with wire lengths, spend an afternoon to learn to compile you own JED.
50 cm wires with loops? Come on, KISS.
I believe at this point, you mean Ki$$, or KiMM (Keep it making money). I'm just saying...
Post by: BerT69 on December 10, 2011, 09:30:00 AM
Post by: jayboy86 on December 10, 2011, 09:12:00 PM
QUOTE(BerT69 @ Dec 10 2011, 05:30 PM)
Is the topic now dead??..when and where is release for the item. I have found nothing on the hardware sites.
I second that question
Post by: kipper2k on December 11, 2011, 10:57:00 AM
I've seen a lot of pictures that peopple show with their wires all over the place, heres a nice simple solution, a piece of cardboard, some scotch tape and wire that is zigzagged to make up the desired length, you could even shield it if you want by putting some tin foil on the top side of the cardboard and then lay the wires.
Heres a pic of a cheap, tidy and simple solution that will save you buying the board
Post by: kipper2k on December 11, 2011, 12:32:00 PM
QUOTE(Blackaddr @ Dec 6 2011, 04:03 AM)
As for changing the source code, Gligli posted all his source code to build your own JED on github. Try to compile his source code as-is using the free ISE Webpack tools (you can probably find general tutorials and guides on using ISE on the web, and ask around for help). Make sure you can compile the unaltered code, program the CPLD and it still works. This proves you're compiling correctly. Just learning this part will be the hardest, but it's worthwhile.
Then, find the following line in slim.vhd:
constant WIDTH_RESET_START : integer := 17357;
That's the one you will change.
Try changing the value from 17357 to 17358. See if it still works, does it work better? Try 17356, same thing, does it still work, is it any more reliable?
It probably sounds like a pain to have to change the code, recompile, reprogram and test. But If 17357 isn't already optimal for your console, then the best value will be very close, like, +/1 or +/- 2 at the most, so you really don't need to try many different values.
Is anyone willing to share and post a jed file (or 3) for the slim that has already been recompiled with the different values
thanks
Post by: kipper2k on December 11, 2011, 03:21:00 PM
QUOTE(cornnatron @ Dec 11 2011, 10:59 PM)
very much tnx for the tip blackaddr now booting 5sec constantly still sometimes takes 15 sec but no longer.
had to use +1 on mine with 1 inch cable and 270uf on matrix glitcher
here for the people who cant compile
trinity timing files cpld
explanation inside
Many thanx, A gentleman and a scholar
Post by: DrZeus on December 12, 2011, 02:01:00 AM
QUOTE(cornnatron @ Dec 11 2011, 09:59 PM)
very much tnx for the tip blackaddr now booting 5sec constantly still sometimes takes 15 sec but no longer.
had to use +1 on mine with 1 inch cable and 270uf on matrix glitcher
here for the people who cant compile
trinity timing files cpld
explanation inside
Wow very interesting. I would like to try different timings on some Zephyr's that just wont glitch no matter what I do. I wonder if it might help. Is there any chance you can do the same and compile for Zephyr's. maybe go +5 either way, I'd really appreciate it as I don't have ISE
Cheers
Post by: cornnatron on December 12, 2011, 04:07:00 AM
QUOTE(DrZeus @ Dec 12 2011, 10:01 AM)
Wow very interesting. I would like to try different timings on some Zephyr's that just wont glitch no matter what I do. I wonder if it might help. Is there any chance you can do the same and compile for Zephyr's. maybe go +5 either way, I'd really appreciate it as I don't have ISE
Cheers
Ill see what i can do tonight ,at work at the moment
And also i aint got no way to test So thats some thing you have to
Do yourself
Post by: cornnatron on December 12, 2011, 02:52:00 PM
diff zephyr timming files
zephyr cpld files
Post by: dokworm on December 12, 2011, 05:27:00 PM
QUOTE(cornnatron @ Dec 12 2011, 12:26 PM)
Ill see what i can do tonight ,at work at the moment .
And also i aint got no way to test zephyrs .
So thats some thing you have to do yourself.
One last thing wich file do you use normaly on the zephyr?
Wow, thanks, you should really start a new thread for this, everyone would be better off doing this rather than messing with unreliable coils of wire or add-on boards.
Post by: DrZeus on December 12, 2011, 09:21:00 PM
QUOTE(cornnatron @ Dec 12 2011, 09:52 PM)
Thanks heaps mate, very helpful!
I can't test tonight cause i'm off to see the Foo Fighters!
Will report back once I get some time to test.
cheers
Post by: cornnatron on December 13, 2011, 07:05:00 AM
as to the new topic ill have a look after i get some reports
Back on how the files work for. People but
Then again i do think ill get more reports on it in its own topic
But i have to compile jasper and falcon files first
Havent made those jet
Cheers corn.
Post by: crimpshrine on December 13, 2011, 08:38:00 AM
My experience with Falcons & Jaspers has been much more consistent. Other then needing an extra cap here and there, have not found a unit yet that is slow at glitching.
My results so far from fiddling with changing + or - 1 or 2 results in no difference on 2 slims I have here. Using a Coolrunner.
On one particular unit the best I have seen so far is a total of 34 cm on the reset wire. (Anywhere from 8-30 seconds on booting pretty constant, and that is back in the case) Thought I would see if I could run the shortest wire possible for the reset wire and change the CPLD code, I was surprised to get a glitch in like 5 seconds the first and second boot, but then never being able to reproduce that again. That was with +1, any of the others I tried never got another successful glitch would only wait up to 50 seconds.. I believe if I let the unit sit for a length being off I might have been able to get a 5 second glitch again. This is also with trying 3.3 constant, Vs 3.3 switched so when the 360 is off, the Coolrunner turns off too.
I would be curious if anyone else is able to adjust the CPU_RST wire to be very short while changing their WIDTH_RESET_START on a Slim and get it to boot consistently.. Out of 2 Slims I have NOT been able to achieve this.
My next test when I get time later is to get it back to where this one unit is booting in 8-30 seconds every time with the default trinity CPLD code, is to adjust it by -1 or +1 to see exactly what effect it has.
I started a thread on team-xecuter's forum yesterday to see if anyone has tried adjusting their timings on a Slim to see what their results are, no one has reported back yet..
http://team-xecuter....ead.php?t=77525
Post by: cornnatron on December 13, 2011, 10:22:00 AM
With the files i posted and a rst of 1inch where previusly
20sec to 2min with 30 odd centimeter wire spliced
Tryed 50 to 20 cm wires spilced and onspliced and that was best i could get.
But that was with the matrix glitch chip.
Post by: DBling on December 14, 2011, 05:53:00 PM
Thanks.
EDIT: It seems that impact will do that...
Post by: Blackaddr on December 18, 2011, 03:56:00 PM
QUOTE(cornnatron @ Dec 11 2011, 04:59 PM)
very much tnx for the tip blackaddr now booting 5sec constantly still sometimes takes 15 sec but no longer.
had to use +1 on mine with 1 inch cable and 270uf on matrix glitcher
here for the people who cant compile
trinity timing files cpld
explanation inside
Good job. I bet it felt pretty damned good after modifying and compiling your own VHDL file and it worked.
This probably won't help everyone, but at least you can try different timings now.
Post by: cornnatron on December 18, 2011, 05:38:00 PM
QUOTE(Blackaddr @ Dec 18 2011, 11:56 PM)
Good job. I bet it felt pretty damned good after modifying and compiling your own VHDL file and it worked.
This probably won't help everyone, but at least you can try different timings now.
well wasnt thirst thing i compiled had some histry with vb6 delphi6 and c# but that seems ages ago now
i know it wont work for every one but mine is killer now
longest ever boot was 26 sec now but 8/10 within 10sec from wich 5/10 within 5sec
so yeh for me worked +1 on matrix chip
Post by: DrZeus on December 21, 2011, 02:39:00 AM
I'm 100% everything else is good, it just seems some Zephyrs wont glitch
thanks for you help anyway
Post by: ARY on January 05, 2012, 05:57:00 AM
QUOTE(DrZeus @ Dec 21 2011, 10:39 AM)
Ok so finally got time to try the Zephyr timing files and tried them all and no difference, no glitch
I'm 100% everything else is good, it just seems some Zephyrs wont glitch
thanks for you help anyway
Try Falcon, Opus or Jasper timing file
It's my timing pack (56 jed files).
http://depositfiles....files/ie3xhy872
Post by: Neptune on January 30, 2012, 06:57:00 PM
QUOTE(cornnatron @ Dec 11 2011, 01:59 PM)
very much tnx for the tip blackaddr now booting 5sec constantly still sometimes takes 15 sec but no longer.
had to use +1 on mine with 1 inch cable and 270uf on matrix glitcher
here for the people who cant compile
trinity timing files cpld
explanation inside
None of these mirrors work AT ALL. =(