Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uflorida!unf7!hite386!steve From: steve@hite386.UUCP (Steve Hite) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware Subject: Re: Apple is dumping 120ns SIMMS into SE/30s Summary: I was wrong! I'm dumber than I thought I was about hardware! :-) Keywords: cheap Message-ID: <16@hite386.UUCP> Date: 2 Feb 90 05:30:06 GMT References: <15@hite386.UUCP> Organization: CS Grad Student @ Univ. of N. Florida Lines: 32 In article <15@hite386.UUCP>, steve@hite386.UUCP (Me) writes: > > Needless to say, I'm not too smart about hardware. But it seems to me > that if I had bought only 4 megs of 80ns memory (upgrading the SE/30 to > 5 megs total) then I would have to replace the 1 meg of 120's with 80's or > my fastest memory access speed would still only be 120ns. Hmm...that stinks, > Mr. Pepsi!! > > BTW, I think the Apple EEs did an EXCELLENT job to keep a 16MHz machine > from choking on 120's with no parity errors...can you do it with a IIci :-)? Thanks to all of the people who quickly pointed out how wrong I am about my SE/30 hardware assumptions and to those e-mail letters pouring in that will echo the first day's batch :-)...I ASSUMED that there were no wait states put in and that it was designed to access RAM faster than 120ns. I also have a 16MHz 386 AT Clone with no wait states and it demands faster memory to run properly so my fleeting past experience with RAM speeds definitely skewed my thinking (thanks Paul M. for being polite about it). I am not alone in my ignorance, though. The kind folks in our local Mac Users Group are also under the false assumption that if you put faster SIMMS in your Mac (i.e. replace them all with 80's) that your Mac will run faster. Bruce Cantie pointed out to me that there is a write-up in the current MACWORLD discussing this issue. I promise to watch some old TV Kung Fu episodes to regain a "humble as the dust" outlook on things that I do not fully understand. Thanks. ------------------------------ Steve Hite ...uflorida!unf7!hite386!steve