NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/comp/sys/ibm/pc/hardware/36705

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-21 | 1.6 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!olivea!inews.Intel.COM!fnugget!thamilto
From: [e-mail] (Tony Hamilton)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Using slower-than-spec RAM
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 21 Jan 93 15:59:29 GMT
Sender: [e-mail] (USENET News System)
Organization: INTEL.FOLSOM
Lines: 23
Nntp-Posting-Host: fnugget

HI. Just bought a 486-33DX machine. For reference, it's an Intel _computer_...
I work at Intel and bought one on an employee offer. Anyway, it came with
4MB installed, in a 32-pin SIMM or something like that (I'm new to memory).

The system also comes with 2 banks of 4 9-pin SIMM sockets, for either 1x9
or 4x9 SIMMs (I still hope I'm getting these pin numbers right. It's the best
I can remember - I don't have my manual with me). Well, anyway, the manual
stated that you can mix and match SIMM types, as long as each bank of 4 has
all the same, and is either all full or all empty. In addition, you can pop
in an 8MB SIMM apparently in place of the 4MB one. Anyway... the manual
suggests 80ns RAM, or faster. Because it was available and _very_ cheap, I
popped in 100ns 1x9's in all 8 extra sockets, giving me 12MB total. Everything
works fine, and I can verify the RAM is working for my applications which
can use it.

My question is: every tech person I talk to says not to do this, but they
can't explain the reasoning behind that caution. I've heard it may have
something to do with the bus and addressing, but I don't see any problems with
the integrity of the memory. Should I be able to get away with this, or is
there still a need for concern?

Tony Hamilton
[e-mail]