From owner-freebsd-questions Sat Jul 5 10:32:04 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA12056 for questions-outgoing; Sat, 5 Jul 1997 10:32:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cerberus.partsnow.com (gatekeeper.partsnow.com [207.155.26.98]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA12051 for ; Sat, 5 Jul 1997 10:32:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from bin@localhost) by cerberus.partsnow.com (8.8.5/8.6.9) id KAA00136; Sat, 5 Jul 1997 10:32:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: cerberus.partsnow.com: bin set sender to using -f Received: from pcconsole(192.168.100.254) by cerberus.partsnow.com via smap (V2.0) id xma000134; Sat, 5 Jul 97 10:32:30 -0700 Message-ID: <33BE84FA.3F23@PartsNow.com> Date: Sat, 05 Jul 1997 10:31:38 -0700 From: Don Wilde Reply-To: don@PartsNow.com Organization: Soligen, Incorporated X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Carey Nairn CC: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: EDO vs non-parity RAM References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk as an addendum / caution to what David G said, most Pentium chipsets DO NOT support parity RAM, so you're stuck with non-parity. EDO is certainly faster than normal ("fast page mode") DRAM. The ideal solution is to get a board which supports DIMM memory with ECC, such as Dell PowerEdge's and a few others. GOOD memory is ALWAYS preferable to fast memory with holes in it... ;) -- oooOOO O O O o * * * * * * o ___ _________ _________ ________ _________ _________ ___==_ V_=_=_DW ===--- Don Wilde [don@PartsNow.com] [http://www.PartsNow.com ] /oo0000oo-oo--oo-ooo---ooo-ooo---ooo-ooo--ooo-ooo---ooo-ooo---ooo-oo--oo