Talk:MMC1: Difference between revisions
From NESdev Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
m (Oops) |
Rainwarrior (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
Just my $2, but I fully agree with Rainwarrior.[[User:Bregalad|Bregalad]] ([[User talk:Bregalad|talk]]) 02:28, 9 August 2015 (MDT) | Just my $2, but I fully agree with Rainwarrior.[[User:Bregalad|Bregalad]] ([[User talk:Bregalad|talk]]) 02:28, 9 August 2015 (MDT) | ||
:Yeah, tepples confirmed it in a discussion elsewhere (and lidnariq seemed to confirm it in an oblique way?). I've already put this information to use in the description at [[NES 2.0 submappers#001: MMC1]] anyway. - [[User:Rainwarrior|Rainwarrior]] ([[User talk:Rainwarrior|talk]]) 11:58, 9 August 2015 (MDT) | |||
Revision as of 17:58, 9 August 2015
SOROM, SUROM, and SXROM
I'm a little fuzzy about why these are considered different NES 2.0 submappers. The functionality of all three of these looks the same to me if the extra banking bits become useless/mirror when the ROM/RAM addressed is a smaller size (just like in any other mapper supporting various sizes).
43210 +---+ PSSxC
4:P - A18 of 512k PRG ROM, disconnected if smaller 3:S - A13 of 16k PRG RAM, disconnected if smaller 2:S - A14 of 32k PRG RAM, disconnected if smaller 1:x - unused 0:C - 4k CHR banking control
What am I missing? I can't spot the incompatibility that necessitated three submappers. Isn't this just one mapper together? - Rainwarrior (talk) 00:58, 8 August 2015 (MDT)
Just my $2, but I fully agree with Rainwarrior.Bregalad (talk) 02:28, 9 August 2015 (MDT)
- Yeah, tepples confirmed it in a discussion elsewhere (and lidnariq seemed to confirm it in an oblique way?). I've already put this information to use in the description at NES 2.0 submappers#001: MMC1 anyway. - Rainwarrior (talk) 11:58, 9 August 2015 (MDT)
