So what are ya trying to say? ;-p
peace,
Rog
http://www.slammingrooves.com
Registered Linux user #190719
On Fri, 15 Dec 2000, Tom Brinkman wrote:
> On Friday 15 December 2000 05:16 pm, Adrian Smith wrote:
> > hey Rog, glad to point you in the right direction. i wouldn't pay
> > $173 for 128M either. that's why i have waited so long to upgrade.
> > and i don't normally recomend companies or products or venders, but
> > crucial did me right, so i'll give 'em a plug now and then. prices
> > are dropping like flies on hardware (except monitors -- oh how i
> > drool over a 21 inch screen). i can't believe CD burners are going
> > for $200 these days - and probably even cheaper now & then on sale.
>
> Guess I'll put my 2 pesos in (again ;>. Ram is what'll do. PC66, PC
> 100, PC133, PC<whatever>, are just labels. Good ram, is judged best by
> its' rating in ns (eg, 8) and it's CL (cas latency rating). Even these
> specs are no better than the reputation of the manufacturer and/or
> vendor. AND even then, it's still no better than how it actually
> performs in the real world. Ask any overclocker.
>
> I've had ancient sticks of SDram (made before the PC66 label was
> even invented) that ran flawlessly at 133mhz with -0- errors. I've got
> a stick of Micron/Crucial 7ns that'll run at 155mhz, flawlessly ... but
> I've also got an old stick of Mosel Vitelic 8ns that was in there right
> a long with it at 155mhz during the same test. The Crucial is labeled
> as 'PC133 Cas2', the Mosel as 'PC100'. Labels, including 'for Dell' or
> 'for Compaq' mean very little. Ram is what'll do with -0- errors.
>
> BUT.... even more important is the stability and quality of the
> motherboard the ram (or anything else for that matter) is run on.
> Excellent quality boards like Asus, Abit, MSI, and Soyo provide extra
> IO support to the ram. A large part of that is by boosting the IO to
> 3.5 <> 3.7 volts rather than the normal 3.3, trace design, and extra
> capacitance. That's why ready mades (Dell, Gateway, Compaq, ...) need
> good ram. The motherboards they use suck.
>
> Bottom line is ram might run great on one board, and suck on another,
> but.... even sucky ram is better than swap ;>
> --
> Tom Brinkman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Galveston Bay
>
>
>
