Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!caip!cbmvax!amiga!jimm
From: jimm@amiga.UUCP (James D. Mackraz)
Newsgroups: net.micro.amiga
Subject: Re: Fraud And Deceit In The Memory Board Market
Message-ID: <1391@amiga.amiga.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 10-Jul-86 14:30:03 EDT
Article-I.D.: amiga.1391
Posted: Thu Jul 10 14:30:03 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 12-Jul-86 04:20:47 EDT
References: <1353@well.UUCP> <1811@shark.UUCP> <567@3comvax.UUCP> <1400@well.UUCP>
Reply-To: jimm@homer.UUCP (Jim Mackraz)
Organization: Commodore-Amiga Inc., 983 University Ave #D, Los Gatos CA 95030
Lines: 21

Keywords:

::

Let me first say that I haven't had the opportunity to verify the
following, but you can test for yourself.

We have had reports that the drhystone benchmark runs significantly
slower in extended memory than in a 512K machine, if that extended
memory is CardCo.  Those with CardCo mem, can you check?  It would
be interesting to measure differences in copying large files from
RAM:a to RAM:b for a 512K machine vs. CardCo extended.

One guy here claims to have hooked up a scope and observed a "goodly
number" of wait states in the CardCo card.  Can anyone verify?

Flame this spot -> X if your observations are contrary to this second-
hand information.

				go wild.
				    jimm

    "I have my two megabytes, what's your problem?"