Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
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: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3.0.2.32.19970705191238.00828c80>