From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Sep 22 07:49:37 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA16116 for freebsd-questions-outgoing; Tue, 22 Sep 1998 07:49:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from kitsune.swcp.com (swcp.com [198.59.115.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id HAA16108 for ; Tue, 22 Sep 1998 07:49:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from msommer@argotsoft.com) Received: from argotsoft.com (argotsoft.com [198.59.115.127]) by kitsune.swcp.com (8.8.8/1.2.3) with ESMTP id IAA27972 for ; Tue, 22 Sep 1998 08:49:04 -0600 (MDT) Received: from rincon (rincon.argotsoft.com [192.168.3.102]) by argotsoft.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA06201 for ; Tue, 22 Sep 1998 08:38:48 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from msommer@argotsoft.com) Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980922083850.00955a20@mail> X-Sender: msommer@mail X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 08:38:50 -0600 To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG From: "Mark J. Sommer" Subject: Re: mixing RAM for FreeBSD ? In-Reply-To: <19980922080420.B7025@oit.umass.edu> References: <199809211439.IAA10132@argotsoft.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 08:04 AM 9/22/98 -0400, Greg Pavelcak wrote: >On Mon, Sep 21, 1998 at 04:56:48AM -0800, groggy@iname.com wrote: >> >> > Another thing to keep in mind is that if you can mix, you'll probably slow >> > your system down. Most motherboards that allow mixing will run at the slower >> > SIMM speeds. I.e. SDRAM typically less than or equal to 12ns, SIMMs typically >> > less than or equal to 60ns, the result is the overall machine will run its >> > memory bus at the 60ns mark. >> >> i wonder is 12ns is overkill. i haven't done any calculations, >> but i wonder if the RAM could be accessed fast enough to take >> advantage of that speed. >> >> ? >Seems to me I read somewhere that the 10/12ns numbers associated >with SDRAM was a marketing ploy. Not that the numbers are >inaccurate, just that the thing being measured at 12ns is *not* >the same thing that is measured at 60ns in the SIMMS. When you >start comparing apples/apples, the numbers are more like 55ns vs. >60ns. > >Or maybe this is a false memory. > >Greg You could be right and I'm more than willing to be educated. Anybody know? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message