Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!lll-tis!ames!elroy!cit-vax!cit-vlsi!flaig
From: flaig@cit-vlsi.Caltech.Edu (Charles M. Flaig)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: 68030-based PC's
Message-ID: <5884@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu>
Date: 23 Mar 88 02:20:22 GMT
References: <8608@g.ms.uky.edu> <2003@cadovax.UUCP> <682@applix.UUCP>
Sender: news@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu
Reply-To: flaig@cit-vlsi.UUCP (Charles M. Flaig)
Distribution: na
Organization: California Institute of Technology
Lines: 26

In article <682@applix.UUCP> scott@applix.UUCP (Scott Evernden) writes:
>In article <2003@cadovax.UUCP> keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle) writes:
>>
>> All I really want is more CHIP ram.
>
>Like maybe the entire address space?
>
>(i.e., Why would/must there even be such a thing as CHIP ram??)
>
>-scott

Having separate Chip RAM allows the co-processors to run at full speed
using Chip RAM, and the 680x0 to run at full speed using "Fast" RAM.
The so-called "Fast" RAM isn't actually any faster, but programs
executing out of it run faster since they don't have to share access
cycles with the co-processors.  This is especially important when your
screen is using overscan and/or a large number of bitplanes.

So, it's not *essential* to have separate Chip RAM (an unexpanded A1000
has only Chip RAM for instance), but for my money it's worthwhile!

______________________________________________________________________________
  ___   ,               ,                                           ,;,;;;,
 /   Y /|              /|              Charles Flaig                ;/@-@\;
|      |/     __, ,__  |/              flaig@csvax.caltech.edu       | ^ |
|      /^\   /  | | |  /  /\  /\                                      \=/ 
 \____/|  \_/|_/\_/ \_/ \_\/_/_/_/     "What, you think they PAY me for this?"