Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!snorkelwacker!husc6!m2c!wpi!dseah From: dseah@wpi.wpi.edu (David I Seah) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2 Subject: Re: Memory chips, was: Re: BITNET mail follows Message-ID: <12630@wpi.wpi.edu> Date: 4 May 90 02:33:16 GMT References: <9005022007.AA01369@apple.com> Reply-To: dseah@wpi.wpi.edu (David I Seah) Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester ,MA Lines: 32 In article cs4w+@andrew.cmu.edu (Charles William Swiger) writes: >I'm afraid that putting faster RAM chips in a computer will do nothing >to make it run faster. Or else I'd be in a long line of //gs owners >who're buying 50ns (very fast, but very expensive) chips that would >triple the speed of my computer that currently uses150ns both on the >motherboard and on the RAM card. >[DRAM timing stuff deleted] >143ns access time required by the CPU. When I was buying memory, chips The CPU has a 143ns access time? I find this odd... Apple seems to enjoy putting higher-rated parts into their hardware for improved reliability (like the greater-than-1Mhz 6502 in the Apple IIc). >Of course, all bets are off when you are running a Transwarp or a high >speed SCSI/DMA card. Then the faster access time of the 80ns chips will >produce a very noticable increase in performance when compared to the >slower 150ns chips. Hmmm... The TWGS and SCSI/DMA board don't automatically detect how fast your DRAM chips are, do they? They must assume minimum speeds, I thought. The SCSI/DMA does its stuff at 1MHz, and I don't think the TWGS assume memory accesses any faster than a stock GS. -- Dave Seah | O M N I D Y N E S Y S T E M S - M | "Yargh, cats!" | User Friendly Killing Machines | .............................................................................. I-net: dseah@wpi.wpi.edu - America Online: AFC DaveS (Apple II Art & Graphics)