MicroMac 68030 in a Mac 128K?

Action Retro

Tinkerer
Oct 19, 2021
49
81
18
I just got this beautiful MicroMac 68030 accelerator that I've spent ages pining for. It should work in any Mac with a 68000 right? Even a 128K/512K?
 

Attachments

  • -plytiy.jpg
    -plytiy.jpg
    171.5 KB · Views: 113

eric

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 2, 2021
961
1,569
93
MN
scsi.blue
Can you show the back too? the SE port isnt populated, just the 68000? Thats quite interesting.
 

Crutch

Tinkerer
Jul 10, 2022
293
228
43
Chicago
That’s one of these https://www.micromac.com/products/performer.html

I doubt it works in a 128K. It’s listed on the manufacturer’s website as needing at least a Plus. I nonspecifically recall that the 64K ROMs can’t support an 030. I have a Total Systems Gemini in my 128K and it wouldn’t run at all until I upgraded the ROMs.
 

Action Retro

Tinkerer
Oct 19, 2021
49
81
18
That’s one of these https://www.micromac.com/products/performer.html

I doubt it works in a 128K. It’s listed on the manufacturer’s website as needing at least a Plus. I nonspecifically recall that the 64K ROMs can’t support an 030. I have a Total Systems Gemini in my 128K and it wouldn’t run at all until I upgraded the ROMs.
Ah yeah, I forgot to mention that my 128K actually has upgraded ROMs (probably plus ROMs?) from the Levco Monster Mac card on it.

I'm wondering if I can stack the 030 card on the Levco. It probably wouldn't hurt anything to try, right? 😅

1664928837878.png
 

Trash80toG4

Active Tinkerer
Apr 1, 2022
919
265
63
Bermuda Triangle, NC USA
Might kill the A/B when you power the double decker kluge up?

You've got the KILLY KLIP needed for a Plus installation, those are rare. If you remove that the Performer should plug directly into the 68000 socket of the LEVCO. Don't think the 68000 is needed IIRC?

Curious board, I've never seen a Plus/Classic configured Performer lacking the inverted socket for Classic installation. Interference with the DRAM ICs would be a problem unless you used the KLIP on the 68000 in place. But that would almost certainly have been too tall to install. May be a lucky break if it works?
 
Last edited:

Crutch

Tinkerer
Jul 10, 2022
293
228
43
Chicago
I love the Monster Mac. I think I toasted mine somehow. Have wanted to get my hands on a second board forever.

The 128K Mac can’t use the 128K ROM without a memory upgrade. There isn’t enough room for HFS, IIRC. So your only way to use that MicroMac accelerator with 128K ROMs in a 128K Mac is also to add memory… at which point it is of course no longer a 128K Mac! Put more succinctly, the answer to “can a 128K Mac support that accelerator” is, I believe, effectively “no”.
 

Crutch

Tinkerer
Jul 10, 2022
293
228
43
Chicago
You can get up to 2MB on a MonsterMac.

But (purist alert maybe, sorry!) I would argue then you are no longer accelerating a 128K. The only thing that distinguishes a 128K from a 512K Mac is how much (or little) memory it has.

If you add memory to a 128K Mac so it has half a meg of RAM then accelerate it, you no longer have a 128K Mac. You have a fast 512K Mac. :) If you get it up to 2MB of RAM you have … well something else, I’m not sure what but it’s not a 128K Mac!
 
Last edited:

Trash80toG4

Active Tinkerer
Apr 1, 2022
919
265
63
Bermuda Triangle, NC USA
Loaded out to the max 128K for DTP kinda purist here. ;)

128K was an all but useless "Comprised Mac" for its PageMaker killer app, hence MonsterMac et al. Without the DTP revolution, there'd be no Macintosh line, just a failed MiniLisa.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crutch

Trash80toG4

Active Tinkerer
Apr 1, 2022
919
265
63
Bermuda Triangle, NC USA
Spot on! Were it not for PageMaker, the LaserWriter and Postscript that drove it and imagesetters of the time, the Mac would undoubtedly have failed. Fontographer was the first Illustration App, Madison Avenue was in love with the stuff.