From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Apr 14 04:50:28 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id EAA06621 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 14 Apr 1997 04:50:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bagpuss.visint.co.uk (bagpuss.visint.co.uk [194.207.134.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id EAA06615 for ; Mon, 14 Apr 1997 04:50:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bagpuss.visint.co.uk (bagpuss.visint.co.uk [194.207.134.1]) by bagpuss.visint.co.uk (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA01959; Mon, 14 Apr 1997 12:55:52 +0100 (BST) Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 12:55:51 +0100 (BST) From: Stephen Roome To: David Langford cc: Amancio Hasty , hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 430TX ? In-Reply-To: <199704112024.KAA00588@caliban.dihelix.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Fri, 11 Apr 1997, David Langford wrote: > What I really dont understand is why HP and ALR(?) seem to be the only > folks doing memory busses larger than 64 bits wide. One would > think that a 128bit 4-way interleaved motherboard would really help > the crappy memory performance of Intel CPU based systems. How about most SGI machines ? take a look at this: http://www.sgi.com/Products/hardware/Power/challenge-xldata.html It's got a 256bit wide memory bus. I know I can't afford one though =) Steve Roome Technical Systems Manager, Vision Interactive Ltd. E: steve@visint.co.uk M: +44 (0) 976 241 342 T: +44 (0) 117 973 0597 F: +44 (0) 117 923 8522