Date: Sat, 05 Jul 1997 19:12:38 -0700 From: Ludwig Pummer <ludwigp@bigfoot.com> To: Michael Alwan <mjalwan@rma.edu>, Shawn Ramsey <shawn@luke.cpl.net> Cc: Don Wilde <don@PartsNow.com>, Carey Nairn <cpn@ccd.tas.gov.au>, questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: EDO vs non-parity RAM Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970705191238.00828c80@mail.sns.com> In-Reply-To: <33BEEF6C.EB4D4427@rma.edu> References: <Pine.BSF.3.95.970705115705.6628A-100000@luke.cpl.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 09:05 PM 7/5/97 -0400, Michael Alwan wrote: >Shawn Ramsey wrote: >> >> Also, if you board doesnt support parity RAM, and is an Intel chipset, it >> won't cache more than 64MB of RAM! The only decent Intel chipset really is >> the HX chipset. (Supports ECC and 512MB of cachable RAM) > >Enlighten me: how does a motherboard "cache" RAM? My Biostar 8500TUC >has the HX chipset, but according to the manual, *supports* just 128MB >of RAM, and can only *cache* 64MB of RAM. (Obviously the motherboard >must itself be constucted to take advantage of the chipset.) Is there >any point in putting more than 64MB on the motherboard? Will more than >64MB of data just swap out to virtual memory, even if I have more than >64MB of RAM? > >Michael The motherboard must support 128MB, and a "tag SRAM" chip must be put on the motherboard to allow it to cache more than 64MB of RAM. And I don't know what cacheing the RAM does, except that it _does_ increase system performance. I learned all this from Tom's Hardware Guide (http://sysdoc.pair.com). --Ludwig Pummer ------------------------------------------------------------------ ludwigp@bigfoot.com ICQ UIN: 692441 http://chipweb.home.ml.org PGP Key & Geek Code available on web page ^-- Updated 07/01/97
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3.0.2.32.19970705191238.00828c80>