Date: Wed, 09 Apr 1997 22:52:56 -0700 From: "Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com" <michaelv@MindBender.serv.net> To: Michael Smith <msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au> Cc: Anthony.Kimball@east.sun.com, smp@csn.net, hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Pentuim or Pentuim Pro ? Message-ID: <199704100552.WAA28402@MindBender.serv.net> In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 10 Apr 97 10:29:33 %2B0930. <199704100059.KAA28539@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Tony Kimball stands accused of saying:
>> Quoth Steve Passe on Wed, 9 April:
[...]
>> cache or random uncached locations, SDRAM is a wash. For my own
>> typical applications, the REAL WORLD performance of SDRAM is
>> substantially better than FPM/EDO/BEDO.
>Hmm, we don't see this. I would call anything that deals with the output
[...]
I would also caution against lumping BEDO in there with FPM and EDO.
If you can believe Micron (the largest US RAM producer), BEDO has just
as much potential as SDRAM, and isn't as radically different of a
design. Have you actually tested your hardware with BEDO?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael L. VanLoon michaelv@MindBender.serv.net
--< Free your mind and your machine -- NetBSD free un*x >--
NetBSD working ports: 386+PC, Mac 68k, Amiga, Atari 68k, HP300, Sun3,
Sun4/4c/4m, DEC MIPS, DEC Alpha, PC532, VAX, MVME68k, arm32...
NetBSD ports in progress: PICA, others...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199704100552.WAA28402>