How do I interpret the PCB revision numbers?
In the case of the STFM, I know that C070789-001 is newer than C070523-001, but can you tell from the revision #? Is it because C070789-001 comes after C070523-001?
Can I then assume, that with the STacy boards C103999-001 is a later version than C103421-001 for the same reason?
What about the letters and numbers? Take this for example:
What is "2" (With #1 pointing to it)?
What is "[5]" (With #2 pointing to it)?
And then this:
This one is a higher revision number than the previous but only has a boxed "[2]" at the end.
Any clue?
Atari PCB Revision #s and their Interpretation
-
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 4:27 am
Re: Atari PCB Revision #s and their Interpretation
Good question, I have no idea!
I used to think like for the C070789 , that it was just the schematics revision dates, 89 being the year etc. Though the STFM was being produced in 85ish anyway ? So I don't think they would have fore-dated the pcbs years in advance. doesn't even closely tally with numbers ending in 52 etc.
Could be last digit is the year like assuming all numbers are 80's.. So C0707889 comes after C0705283
Then would assume numbers before were the week, but "78" doesn't fit into it all there. Doesn't make much sense why both series start in 07 either.
I used to think like for the C070789 , that it was just the schematics revision dates, 89 being the year etc. Though the STFM was being produced in 85ish anyway ? So I don't think they would have fore-dated the pcbs years in advance. doesn't even closely tally with numbers ending in 52 etc.
Could be last digit is the year like assuming all numbers are 80's.. So C0707889 comes after C0705283
Then would assume numbers before were the week, but "78" doesn't fit into it all there. Doesn't make much sense why both series start in 07 either.
https://www.exxosforum.co.uk/atari/ All my hardware guides - mods - games - STOS
https://www.exxosforum.co.uk/atari/store2/ - All my hardware mods for sale - Please help support by making a purchase.
viewtopic.php?f=17&t=1585 Have you done the Mandatory Fixes ?
Just because a lot of people agree on something, doesn't make it a fact. ~exxos ~
People should find solutions to problems, not find problems with solutions.
https://www.exxosforum.co.uk/atari/store2/ - All my hardware mods for sale - Please help support by making a purchase.
viewtopic.php?f=17&t=1585 Have you done the Mandatory Fixes ?
Just because a lot of people agree on something, doesn't make it a fact. ~exxos ~
People should find solutions to problems, not find problems with solutions.
-
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 4:27 am
Re: Atari PCB Revision #s and their Interpretation
I think I have cracked it and I'm pretty sure we can assume that a higher number means a later revision.
Seems like every Atari PCB has a four digit code in the vicinity of the revision number. I now understand it to signify the week and year of manufacture.
Looking at the STacy:
C103421-001 has wk32 1989 C103999-001 has wk20 1990 Jumping to ST-STFM
An early ST, C070243 has wk49 1985 STFM C070523 has wk11 1987 STFM C070789 REV D has wk20 1988 STFM C070789 REV F2, the latest known STFM has wk42 1990 Finally the Mega ST
C100167 has wk3 1990 C103277 has wk03 1989 (only exception here but maybe ST1 ST2 ST4 had different revisions) C103544 has wk33 1990 I'm pretty convinced by this evidence.
Seems like every Atari PCB has a four digit code in the vicinity of the revision number. I now understand it to signify the week and year of manufacture.
Looking at the STacy:
C103421-001 has wk32 1989 C103999-001 has wk20 1990 Jumping to ST-STFM
An early ST, C070243 has wk49 1985 STFM C070523 has wk11 1987 STFM C070789 REV D has wk20 1988 STFM C070789 REV F2, the latest known STFM has wk42 1990 Finally the Mega ST
C100167 has wk3 1990 C103277 has wk03 1989 (only exception here but maybe ST1 ST2 ST4 had different revisions) C103544 has wk33 1990 I'm pretty convinced by this evidence.
Re: Atari PCB Revision #s and their Interpretation
The date does look correct yes... But this doesn't explain the C0XXXXX type numbers though?
https://www.exxosforum.co.uk/atari/ All my hardware guides - mods - games - STOS
https://www.exxosforum.co.uk/atari/store2/ - All my hardware mods for sale - Please help support by making a purchase.
viewtopic.php?f=17&t=1585 Have you done the Mandatory Fixes ?
Just because a lot of people agree on something, doesn't make it a fact. ~exxos ~
People should find solutions to problems, not find problems with solutions.
https://www.exxosforum.co.uk/atari/store2/ - All my hardware mods for sale - Please help support by making a purchase.
viewtopic.php?f=17&t=1585 Have you done the Mandatory Fixes ?
Just because a lot of people agree on something, doesn't make it a fact. ~exxos ~
People should find solutions to problems, not find problems with solutions.
-
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 4:27 am
Re: Atari PCB Revision #s and their Interpretation
Yes, it is well known that the date code on the PCB gives -- of course -- the date of manufacture (week and year, as you wrote).Atarian Computing wrote: ↑Fri Apr 27, 2018 10:21 am I think I have cracked it and I'm pretty sure we can assume that a higher number means a later revision.
Seems like every Atari PCB has a four digit code in the vicinity of the revision number. I now understand it to signify the week and year of manufacture.
However, talking about the part numbers such as C070789, I'm still not convinced they were assigned strictly in ascending order. Note that there is only one numbering scheme for all Atari parts, be it discrete components, chips, PCBs. For example the IMP GLUE is C070714, while the IMP MMU C100109, putting them next to the C070789 and C100167 PCBs, respectively. The STE DMA is C398739, while the first STE PCB is C300779.
Re: Atari PCB Revision #s and their Interpretation
It could literally just be the part numbers, and the part number used the next available one in the whole part range which Atari sold.Atarian Computing wrote: ↑Fri Apr 27, 2018 10:49 am I think it's just a serial number without any significance. The correlation is simply that a higher revision number seems to have a later date.
I guess you could look at this page as it lists a lot of numbers may give more clues...
http://www.best-electronics-ca.com/custom-i.htm
https://www.exxosforum.co.uk/atari/ All my hardware guides - mods - games - STOS
https://www.exxosforum.co.uk/atari/store2/ - All my hardware mods for sale - Please help support by making a purchase.
viewtopic.php?f=17&t=1585 Have you done the Mandatory Fixes ?
Just because a lot of people agree on something, doesn't make it a fact. ~exxos ~
People should find solutions to problems, not find problems with solutions.
https://www.exxosforum.co.uk/atari/store2/ - All my hardware mods for sale - Please help support by making a purchase.
viewtopic.php?f=17&t=1585 Have you done the Mandatory Fixes ?
Just because a lot of people agree on something, doesn't make it a fact. ~exxos ~
People should find solutions to problems, not find problems with solutions.
-
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 4:27 am
Re: Atari PCB Revision #s and their Interpretation
Ah, right. My main intention was just to determine which revision was the most recent. Not so much the reasons behind the numbering schemes.czietz wrote: ↑Fri Apr 27, 2018 10:51 amYes, it is well known that the date code on the PCB gives -- of course -- the date of manufacture (week and year, as you wrote).Atarian Computing wrote: ↑Fri Apr 27, 2018 10:21 am I think I have cracked it and I'm pretty sure we can assume that a higher number means a later revision.
Seems like every Atari PCB has a four digit code in the vicinity of the revision number. I now understand it to signify the week and year of manufacture.
However, talking about the part numbers such as C070789, I'm still not convinced they were assigned strictly in ascending order. Note that there is only one numbering scheme for all Atari parts, be it discrete components, chips, PCBs. For example the IMP GLUE is C070714, while the IMP MMU C100109, putting them next to the C070789 and C100167 PCBs, respectively. The STE DMA is C398739, while the first STE PCB is C300779.
Josh.
Re: Atari PCB Revision #s and their Interpretation
Note that at least for the STF(m) there were a lot of board versions manufactured in parallel. So from a single datecode alone you cannot say whether the actual PCB design is older or newer.Atarian Computing wrote: ↑Fri Apr 27, 2018 11:00 am Ah, right. My main intention was just to determine which revision was the most recent. Not so much the reasons behind the numbering schemes.
E.g. this C103175 has a datecode of 42/88:
https://www.exxosforum.co.uk/forum/downl ... hp?id=2250
This C103253 as well:
https://www.exxosforum.co.uk/forum/downl ... hp?id=2172
This C070789 has a datecode of 20/88:
https://www.exxosforum.co.uk/forum/downl ... hp?id=1566
This C070789 has a datecode of 42/90:
https://www.exxosforum.co.uk/forum/downl ... hp?id=2333
-
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 4:27 am
Re: Atari PCB Revision #s and their Interpretation
In the case of the C070789 you linked (my machines btw) the differentiating factor is the REV code. D for the earlier one and F2 for the later one. That just confirms my point. Now, those are of course single examples. If I see an F2 with 0389 and a C with 0590, my theory is gone.czietz wrote: ↑Fri Apr 27, 2018 11:54 amNote that at least for the STF(m) there were a lot of board versions manufactured in parallel. So from a single datecode alone you cannot say whether the actual PCB design is older or newer.Atarian Computing wrote: ↑Fri Apr 27, 2018 11:00 am Ah, right. My main intention was just to determine which revision was the most recent. Not so much the reasons behind the numbering schemes.
E.g. this C103175 has a datecode of 42/88:
https://www.exxosforum.co.uk/forum/downl ... hp?id=2250
This C103253 as well:
https://www.exxosforum.co.uk/forum/downl ... hp?id=2172
This C070789 has a datecode of 20/88:
https://www.exxosforum.co.uk/forum/downl ... hp?id=1566
This C070789 has a datecode of 42/90:
https://www.exxosforum.co.uk/forum/downl ... hp?id=2333
I earlier already alluded to the fact that Atari must have used different revisions in parallel in the case of various Mega ST models.
EDIT:
So let's say that Mega ST C100167 was co-produced with C103277 as it clearly was, if my theory is correct the earliest known C100167 would have to be manufactured earlier than the earliest known C103277.
Let's say we have a sample size of 100 for each revision. And let's say that C100167 has a date range of 1987-1990 and the C103277 has 1988-1990. If there are no known C103277 from 1987, it's pretty safe to say that C100167 is an earlier design.