Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!dali!milton!max!scott
From: scott@max.u.washington.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.cbm
Subject: Re: 4164 question
Message-ID: <13476.2607039a@max.u.washington.edu>
Date: 21 Mar 90 12:31:21 GMT
References: <6056@star.cs.vu.nl>
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle WA
Lines: 17

In article <6056@star.cs.vu.nl>, rcwlobe@cs.vu.nl (Reg Lobee) writes:
> I am planning to built an additional 64k ram into my c64. I want to do this by
> putting another eight 4164's into it. Looking at adverbs I saw that the 4164 is
> available as 120 and 150 ns model. Because the c64 is a slow computer I think
> the cheaper 150ns type should be sufficient. Is this assumption correct?
> What is the exact relation between the speed of the processor and the rams? In
> other words: What is the slowest possible ram that could be built into the c64?
>
> I sure hope someone has a clear answer to this question.
>
> Reg Lobee
> rcwlobe@cs.vu.nl
> mcsun!botter!rcwlobe
 
About the speed of chips, 150ns is more than adaquate for the C64.
I can't be specific, but I can says these, an IBM XT/Compatible 
uses memory chips no faster than 150ns.