Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!seismo!sundc!hqda-ai!cos!patrick
From: patrick@cos.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: 1Meg in AT, Can it be used?
Message-ID: <256@cos.COM>
Date: Fri, 15-May-87 12:30:19 EDT
Article-I.D.: cos.256
Posted: Fri May 15 12:30:19 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 16-May-87 15:12:08 EDT
Organization: Corporation for Open Systems, McLean, VA
Lines: 36
Keywords: AT Memory


	I recently bought an AT-clone.  When I bought it I was told
by the seller that "It was probably more usefull to get 640K put on
my motherboard rather than 1Meg".  He went into several reasons, but
because I don't think I understood them I will not try to rephase them.

	My question stems from a inconsistency in logic (phrased below):
Given that:
	I thought on the IBM PC/XT that the space between 640K and 1Meg
	was used for various peripherals, and as such was not
	"generally useable".

So I deduced that:
	Because the AT is very compatible with the PC/XT, the AT also
	uses the space between 640K and 1Meg for various peripherals,
	and so the space between 640K and 1Meg is not "generally usable"

SO NOW, I have the problem that:
	If you stick 1Meg into an AT, How does the AT "use" the space
	between 640K and 1Meg????  Confussion sets in :^)


	My question is:
If the AT motherboard is stuffed with 1Meg of RAM is the RAM split
up into two physically addressable areas (i.e., 0-512K, and 1000K-1500K,
or 0-640K, and 1000K-1340K)?


Ok.  So maybe my question is stupid, maybe I should learn more about the
AT...   but, please don't insult me any more than you feel it is deserved.
Please send responses directly to to me.  If I more than a handfull of
interested people I will post the answer(s) I have received.

patrick (Patrick Steranka @ Corporation for Open Systems)
	-- patrick@cos.com
	-- {seismo!sundc, hadron, hqda-ai}!cos!patrick