Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 10 Apr 1997 11:08:20 -0400
From:      Dave Alderman <dave@persprog.com>
To:        Stephen Roome <steve@visint.co.uk>
Cc:        hardware@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Pentuim or Pentuim Pro ?
Message-ID:  <334D0264.BAD92424@persprog.com>
References:  <Pine.BSF.3.91.970410153351.23602K-100000@bagpuss.visint.co.uk>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Stephen Roome wrote:
> 
> Obviously getting a board that supports more cacheable memory is a good
> idea, but assuming memory prices continue to drop then by the time I want
> another 64MB of memory in both machines I should be able to get two new
> (even better) motherboards as well for the same price as I would pay for
> that 64MB now.. Well, that's all opinion, but it seems to make sense to
> me. (Which means that it's probably wrong !)
> 
> Steve Roome (underfunded)

Your logic makes sense to me.  I must claim some bias in this affair
since I 
hate to be forced to do anything (like buy a motherboard that
deliberately restricts your memory usage).  
-- 
It's not my fault!  It's some guy named "General Protection"!
--Ratbert
David W. Alderman	dave@persprog.com



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?334D0264.BAD92424>