Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 26 Feb 1997 11:31:48 -0500 (EST)
From:      Chuck Robey <chuckr@glue.umd.edu>
To:        Vincent Poy <vince@mail.MCESTATE.COM>
Cc:        Philippe Regnauld <regnauld@deepo.prosa.dk>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: [H] Optimal computer for FreeBSD
Message-ID:  <Pine.ULT.3.95q.970226112842.10802A-100000@timer.eng.umd.edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95.970226051802.438J-100000@mail.MCESTATE.COM>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 26 Feb 1997, Vincent Poy wrote:

> On Wed, 26 Feb 1997, Philippe Regnauld wrote:
> 
> > 	Conclusion: use Parity RAM, but EDO is unnecessary :-)
> 
> 	Ahhh... The problem is some motherboards don't support the parity
> anyways and x32 is cheaper than x36.  Does anyone know if EDO RAM will
> work on non-EDO machines?

Huh?  What has the number of bits got to do with the FPM vs. EDO
question?  They can both come in parity or non-parity, the EDO thing just
modifies some of the timing parameters.

I think that EDO is cheaper right now than FPM, because of volume
questions, anyways, so you get EDO even tho there's no benefit from it,
because there's no loss from getting it.


----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
Chuck Robey                 | Interests include any kind of voice or data 
chuckr@eng.umd.edu          | communications topic, C programming, and Unix.
9120 Edmonston Ct #302      |
Greenbelt, MD 20770         | I run Journey2 and picnic, both FreeBSD
(301) 220-2114              | version 3.0 current -- and great FUN!
----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.ULT.3.95q.970226112842.10802A-100000>