Path: utzoo!censor!isgtec!bmw
From: bmw@isgtec.UUCP (Bruce Walker)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: IBM PC prehistory
Message-ID: <253@isgtec.UUCP>
Date: 29 Dec 89 20:22:48 GMT
References: <21559@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> <76700097@p.cs.uiuc.edu> <1957@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> <47076@sgi.sgi.com> <73@zds-ux.UUCP>
Reply-To: bmw@isgtec.UUCP (Bruce Walker)
Distribution: na
Organization: ISG Technologies Inc., Mississauga, Ontario
Lines: 23

In article <73@zds-ux.UUCP> gerry@zds-ux.UUCP (Gerry Gleason) writes:
> In article <47076@sgi.sgi.com> bruceh@brushwud.sgi.com (Bruce R. Holloway) writes:
> >... back when 64Kx8 or 256Kx8 of DRAM was
> >still somewhat expensive, it would be a significant economic advantage
> >to be able to buy only that much, instead of having to spring for 64Kx16
> >or 256Kx16.  Still speculation on my part--I never worked for 'em.
> 
> Only that at the time, 64kx1 DRAM's were pretty new, and the original
> PC's were socketted for 16kx1 chips, so the memory increment argument
> does not work.

The argument is valid because the original PC was shipped with one row
of 16Kx1's soldered in.  Later, when OS requirements changed, the
sockets were filled to 32K, 48K and *even* 64K of 16K chips! :-)

The same argument influences the design of the 32 bit PC's today.
256Kx1 chips are very popular for "entry-level" machines.  One
row of 256K's is of course 1 Meg, which is "perfect" for an AT-style
architecture.
-- 
Bruce Walker                            ...uunet!utai!lsuc!isgtec!bmw
"Just say, ``No!'' to bugs."                        isgtec!bmw@censor
ISG Technologies Inc. 3030 Orlando Dr. Mississauga. Ont. Can. L4V 1S8