From owner-freebsd-hardware Mon Nov 23 16:25:39 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA09777 for freebsd-hardware-outgoing; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 16:25:39 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from n4hhe.ampr.org (tnt1-200.HiWAAY.net [208.147.147.200]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA09758 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 16:25:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dkelly@n4hhe.ampr.org) Received: from n4hhe.ampr.org (localhost.ampr.org [127.0.0.1]) by n4hhe.ampr.org (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA21461 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 17:47:05 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from dkelly@n4hhe.ampr.org) Message-Id: <199811232347.RAA21461@n4hhe.ampr.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG From: David Kelly Subject: Re: tyan S1836DLUAN >512Mb problems In-reply-to: Message from "Open Systems Inc." of "Mon, 23 Nov 1998 10:44:55 CST." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 17:47:05 -0600 Sender: owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org "Open Systems Inc." writes: > Erm wasnt there a problem with the PII's with caching a gig of ram or > something? Perhaps this is the problem? Ditto. That's what I was thinking. At least the first generation of PII's had some issue with caching beyond 512M. While the older PPro didn't have that limitation. Has this limitation been removed? Was it internal to the CPU or did it involve a change to the P-II pinout? -- David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@nospam.hiwaay.net ===================================================================== The human mind ordinarily operates at only ten percent of its capacity -- the rest is overhead for the operating system. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hardware" in the body of the message