How to tell what ROM version on A3000

[InTheSand]

I guess it depends on what you want to do with your Amiga - if you're after more RAM to increase speed, you may find it better to get a basic accelerator (though these can be expensive) and expand that.

 - Ali

[irishmike]

well honestly I plan to play all my favorite Sierra Games on it right now, but I have other plans for a BBS (for preservation -- see post about my project in General Amiga) but I haven't decided if I may buy another A3000 for the BBS and use this one for the games... I really missed Kings Quest, Space Quest and Leisure Suit Larry :-)

So I just want those games to run smoothly, though on the PC side (back in the day) the more graphics ability and RAM you had, the better they performed :-D

But the AmigaOS is so much smaller than MS-DOS so it probably won't be as bad as that was.  But that was one reason for maxing out the Chip and Fast RAM.

[TjLaZer]

What you could do it get the 4MB RAM and ROM, install it and use  it, then when you get the other 12MB install that.  That would be fine.  You will see what I mean when you do the initial upgrade.

To line up the screws is wasy.  Place the A3000 face down on a padded surface like a clean carpet, then press down hard while inserting the screws and screw them in.  It may be a little tough but it can be done.  (I would not do that until you get the final stuff in though)

Good luck with your Amiga 3000.  It is a great machine.  Just make sure you remove the battery and clean up the board if it even hinted of a leak.  The Amber is in that area and will cause video problems or worse.

[Morax]

irishmike wrote:
well honestly I plan to play all my favorite Sierra Games on it right now, but I have other plans for a BBS (for preservation -- see post about my project in General Amiga) but I haven't decided if I may buy another A3000 for the BBS and use this one for the games... I really missed Kings Quest, Space Quest and Leisure Suit Larry :-)

So I just want those games to run smoothly, though on the PC side (back in the day) the more graphics ability and RAM you had, the better they performed :-D

But the AmigaOS is so much smaller than MS-DOS so it probably won't be as bad as that was.  But that was one reason for maxing out the Chip and Fast RAM.

I know what you mean, I played most of those Sierra Adventures too on the Amiga. But I'll have to admit, they're just (not even well-done, if you just look at other point&click adventure, like the LucasArts ones) ports of the PC-version, with a turned-down color-palette (for the "newer" ones, like KQ 5 and SQ 4). They don't really make advantage of the Amiga hardware, and since 1993 Sierra didn't even made Amiga-conversions anymore. I don't know why  :-( )

But I'm not saying you're better off with the PC versions, since then you'll need a DOS-emulator to get them working  :lol:

[irishmike]

Yes indeed, I feel the DOS emulation route or the like is a real pain and of course building a Pentium (1) level machine and running DOS is of course an option, but the games are a lot harder to get than the AMI versions.  I understood that the sound was actually a little better on the AMI (and Macintosh) than the PCs were.

The other part of most emulators are they run too fast for the Sierra games and cause nifty errors.

So I think I found my ideal for that :-)  Even if they don't take full advantage of the hardware... like most ports from PC ever did ;-)

[Morax]

The sound was slightly better, although the music was mostly a direct port from the Yamaha OPL-2/3 MIDI-Synthesis (what most Soundblasters and clones used).

But if you'll ever need the PC-versions, maybe this site comes in usefull, unless you're after the original packages... (It also has LucasArts abandonware by the way):

EDIT:
Abandoned Games Room

By the look at that site again, it's too bad a lot of those didn't make it to the amiga, like Gabriel Knight...  :-(

[Kernel]

adolescent wrote:
Just disconnect any hard drives and take out any floppies and wait for the boot screen.  It will say the ROM version there.

BTW, you need 3.1 ROMs for OS3.9.

I'm so glad I logged in to check things tonight and found this thread.  I recently got an A3000 off of eBay and have slowly been relearning what I forgot over the years since my 1998 break with the Amiga (I had a LOADED A3000 back then - I mean 18MB + Picasso IV + 32X CD-ROM loaded).  I thought I had a 1.4 ROM machine because it's a 6.1 motherboard, and the ROM chips look to be flashable, and are labeled AMD.  They have paper covering the wafer windows with handwriting on them that is virtually falling off because the glue is so old (I put tape over them to hold it on).

Well, I decided to unhook the drive tonight since the 2 mouse buttons always brought me to a boot menu that did NOT offer 1.3/2.0.  Low an behold, they are 3.1 ROMS!  I'm not sure if they were fabbed by the previous owner or just an early version, but to me, it's a score.  I had been contemplating buying set... good thing I procrastenated

BTW, is there any way to tell what version a kickstart FILE is?  Another of the reasons I thought my machine had a 1.4 ROM was because the HD is labeled WB_2.x (although 3.x installed) and there is a kickstart file in the DEVS: directory - I had thought THAT was loading 3.1, but knowing it's not even loading now makes me wonder what it is.

Thanks!

[TjLaZer]

Cool sounds like you have 3.1 ROMs!  Score!

Well if the kickstart file is 256k it is Kickstart 1.x, if it is 512k it is Kickstart 2.x or 3.x.  You could use a hex editor to view the file,  or better yet copy it over to a PC and run WinUAE with it! :-)

[Kernel]

Does anyone know how I can tell if they are genuine 3.1 ROMS or if the previous owner burned them from an image?  As the labesl that were fallingoff of them were hand written and there is the window showing the wafers, I'm not sure.

However, the serial # on the motherboard is 199, so I guess it could be possible that at some point in its life, this one was a development machine and could have received a first batch of 3.1's?

[TjLaZer]

If there is a window they are EPROMS and were burned from an image.

[Zac67]

Well, I bought my A3k ROM kit from a dealer - whom I really trust - and they were EPROMs, too. Investigating on this, they told me that only the very first batch were PROMs (no masked ROMs were produced at all for A3k), everything they got after that were EPROMs. So there seems to be no sure distinction...

[Kernel]

Zac67 wrote:
Well, I bought my A3k ROM kit from a dealer - whom I really trust - and they were EPROMs, too. Investigating on this, they told me that only the very first batch were PROMs (no masked ROMs were produced at all for A3k), everything they got after that were EPROMs. So there seems to be no sure distinction...

What do your chips look like?  I wonder if they have the AMD codes on the cip also like mine have?