Lo-tech ISA CompactFlash Adapter revision 2b + Tandy TL/2 anyone do a recent install?

[mmlenz]

Subject typo: Actually not sure if it's a rev 2b or rev3. TexElec has conflicting info on their site.

I'm getting ready to install this tonight and I was wondering if anyone has installed one of these recently into a TL/2 or 3 (found some older archived posts from years ago which might not be relevant anymore).

Looks like TexElec (the unit I purchased) flashes these with IDE_XT.BIN before testing/shipping.

Will TL/2 benefit from the IDE_XTP.BIN since it's a 286? I thought I read somewhere that the 286 in the TL series didn't take advantage of many of the 286 instructions and acted more like a 8088/8086 but maybe I misread that.

Also, the lo-tech site provides a padded version of the rom to push the address to CC00h and get it out of the way of C800h. I believe this is the IDE_XT.BIN that's been done this way. How would I do so with XTP if using it would be advantageous.

EDIT:

I added a post and I guess since I'm new everything has to be approved by a moderator. Anyway, I wanted to say that before I bothered updating to a padded bios rom I tried it running on D800h (configured it that way with the jumper before even installing in the unit) and it works perfectly.

 

[mojorific]

Subject typo: Actually not sure if it's a rev 2b or rev3. TexElec has conflicting info on their site.

I'm getting ready to install this tonight and I was wondering if anyone has installed one of these recently into a TL/2 or 3 (found some older archived posts from years ago which might not be relevant anymore).

Looks like TexElec (the unit I purchased) flashes these with IDE_XT.BIN before testing/shipping.

Will TL/2 benefit from the IDE_XTP.BIN since it's a 286? I thought I read somewhere that the 286 in the TL series didn't take advantage of many of the 286 instructions and acted more like a 8088/8086 but maybe I misread that.

Also, the lo-tech site provides a padded version of the rom to push the address to CC00h and get it out of the way of C800h. I believe this is the IDE_XT.BIN that's been done this way. How would I do so with XTP if using it would be advantageous.

You need the padded version of the ROM for the TL/2 as it does not work on the default address C800h (which conflicts). That's all I can say. The standard flash does not work on the TL/2 at all. Won't recognize it.

 

[mmlenz]

Oddly I had zero problems after all. I just switched it to D800h before even attempting to use it and everything worked perfectly first try.

 

[Krille]

Will TL/2 benefit from the IDE_XTP.BIN since it's a 286?

Yes indeed.

Also, the lo-tech site provides a padded version of the rom to push the address to CC00h and get it out of the way of C800h. I believe this is the IDE_XT.BIN that's been done this way. How would I do so with XTP if using it would be advantageous.

First configure the BIOS with XTIDECFG.COM, then in DEBUG, do this;

-[B]f100 4100 ff[/B]
-[B]npadding.bin[/B]
-[B]rcx[/B]
CX 0000  :[B]4000[/B]
-[B]w[/B]
Writing 4000 bytes
-[B]q[/B]

Then do this;

[B]copy/b padding.bin+ide_xtp.bin xub.bin[/B]

Now you can use the Lo-tech flash utility to program the board with xub.bin. Also, you might want to use the large build (ide_xtpl.bin) instead if you want the boot menu.

 

[Malc]

Oddly I had zero problems after all. I just switched it to D800h before even attempting to use it and everything worked perfectly first try.

The padded version of the XUB on the lo-tech site was IIRC for the original lo-tech isa-cf adapter which was fixed at C800h

 

[mmlenz]

I read some posts about people not having luck with various lo-tech cards running on D800 on TL/2's either which is just odd. I do still have an old dead smartdrive plugged in on this machine and I'll remove it and see what if any impact it has. Going to try out the XTP rom tonight after I run a disktest to see what kind of throughput i'm already getting on the stock rom.

 

[mmlenz]

Here are the benchmarks for XTP and XT. Read/write are basically double.

https://imgur.com/a/IK9L0ad

 

[GrandPoobah]

Here's a couple benchmarks for you. The first is a TL/3 with a ST351A/X drive. The second is a SX with Lo-tech CF (old-ass Plexar 256meg CF) at normal speed, then with the 286 accelerator turned on. Its pretty clear on the SX that the CPU is a major bottleneck.

 

[sarawill]

Subject typo: Actually not sure if it's a rev 2b or rev3. TexElec has conflicting info on their site.

I'm getting ready to install this tonight and I was wondering if anyone has installed one of these recently into a TL/2 or 3 (found some older archived posts from years ago which might not be relevant anymore).

Looks like TexElec (the unit I purchased) flashes these with IDE_XT.BIN before testing/shipping.

Will TL/2 benefit from the IDE_XTP.BIN since it's a 286? I thought I read somewhere that the 286 in the TL series didn't take advantage of many of the 286 instructions and acted more like a 8088/8086 but maybe I misread that.

Also, the lo-tech site provides a padded version of the rom to push the address to CC00h and get it out of the way of C800h. I believe this is the IDE_XT.BIN that's been done this way. How would I do so with XTP if using it would be advantageous.

EDIT:

I added a post and I guess since I'm new everything has to be approved by a moderator. Anyway, I wanted to say that before I bothered updating to a padded bios rom I tried it running on D800h (configured it that way with the jumper before even installing in the unit) and it works perfectly.

Just chiming in to clarify, these are rev3. We had a data entry error that spanned over a long period of time that I just caught it recently. The site consistently reflects this now. So sorry for the confusion.

 

[mmlenz]

Just chiming in to clarify, these are rev3. We had a data entry error that spanned over a long period of time that I just caught it recently. The site consistently reflects this now. So sorry for the confusion.

Rev 3 Lo-tech XT-CF? Rev 3 must be something different than the Lo-tech v3? https://www.lo-tech.co.uk/wiki/XT-CFv3 correct? Because those use dip-switches instead of jumpers now right?