Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!rex!ukma!dftsrv!mimsy!mojo!eng.umd.edu!tgoose
From: tgoose@eng.umd.edu (Jason Garms)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware
Subject: Re: IIci cache cards - is bigger better?
Keywords: mac, ram cache
Message-ID: <1991Apr5.043033.24260@eng.umd.edu>
Date: 5 Apr 91 04:30:33 GMT
References: <25351@hydra.gatech.EDU> <1991Apr1.222131.1696@cpsc.ucalgary.ca>
Sender: news@eng.umd.edu (C-News)
Reply-To: tgoose@eng.umd.edu (Jason Garms)
Organization: College of Engineering, Maryversity of Uniland, College Park
Lines: 11

In article <1991Apr1.222131.1696@cpsc.ucalgary.ca>, sharp@fsd.cpsc.ucalgary.ca (Maurice Sharp) writes:
>     No, bigger is NOT better. Studies have shown that 32K is all you
> need. There is no significant difference between 32K, 64K or 128K
> cache cards.
> 
This follows exactly what I have heard.
In fact, I might even give Apple`s CACHE card a try.
(In case anyone missed it, Apple is shipping again!)

Jason Garms
tgoose@eng.umd.edu