From owner-freebsd-hardware Fri Jun 19 10:54:01 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA01713 for freebsd-hardware-outgoing; Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:54:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from clifford.inch.com (omar@clifford.inch.com [207.240.140.163]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA01582 for ; Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:53:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from omar@clifford.inch.com) Received: (from omar@localhost) by clifford.inch.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA21685; Fri, 19 Jun 1998 13:46:36 -0400 Message-ID: <19980619134635.A21640@clifford.inch.com> Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 13:46:35 -0400 From: Omar Thameen To: freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: 64M SIMM differences Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.91.1i Sender: owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org In addition to all the parity/nonparity, EDO issues, I've been made aware that there are 2 types of 64M SIMMs - one has 8 chips on it and the other has 32 chips. Is there a difference in performance for these two types? The fact that the 32 chip 64M SIMM is half the price of the 8 chip version indicates one thing, but OTOH I called Kingston and their tech support told me that the SIMMs perform the same. Omar To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hardware" in the body of the message