Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!emory!mephisto!ncsuvx!news
From: rnf@shumv1.uucp (Rick Fincher)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: RAM chips
Message-ID: <1989Dec14.060319.4429@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu>
Date: 14 Dec 89 06:03:19 GMT
References: <memo.197605@lynx.northeastern.edu> <968@madnix.UUCP> <5866@wpi.wpi.edu> <128663@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <6209@wpi.wpi.edu>
Reply-To: rnf@shumv1.ncsu.edu (Rick Fincher)
Organization: NCSU Computing Center
Lines: 23

In article <6209@wpi.wpi.edu> greyelf@wpi.wpi.edu (Michael J Pender) writes:
>[lots of stuff nuked]
>>> >   Is it all right to use 120ns chips instead of 150ns in the Apple 
>>> >   Memory Card?  Can you mix the 120 and 150 chips within the same 
>>> >   set of 8?
>>> I wouldn't mix the 120s and 150s on the same set of 8, the 120s
>>> would get done before the 150s.  
>>

>120 nsec chips on the card with them.  If the card provides for
>being driven faster than the 150 nsec chips can move, stick to
>120 nsec chips.
>

Since the IIgs determines the maximum time allowed (150 ns) it doesn't
really matter what the card supports (except for odd cards like the
AE cards that require 120 ns chips because of things they do to get
DMA compatibility past 4 rows of chips) as long as it meets the minimum.
If faster slots are used in the future, current cards probably won't
be compatible anyway.

Rick Fincher
rnf@shumv1.ncsu.edu