home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
- Path: sparky!uunet!psinntp!isc-newsserver!ritvax.isc.rit.edu!AJB8886
- From: ajb8886@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
- Subject: Re: Have I done something stupid? (a SIMM question)
- Message-ID: <1993Jan23.162223.2005@ultb.isc.rit.edu>
- Sender: news@ultb.isc.rit.edu (USENET News System)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: vaxa.isc.rit.edu
- Reply-To: ajb8886@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
- Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology
- References: <ETOBKKC.93Jan21073459@pluto.eto.ericsson.se>
- Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 16:22:23 GMT
- Lines: 36
-
- In article <ETOBKKC.93Jan21073459@pluto.eto.ericsson.se>, etobkkc@pluto.eto.ericsson.se (Karlsen Bjorn) writes:
- >I have a 486DX-33MHz with 4MB RAM (4*1MB*9). Recently I got 1MB
- >for free (4*256kB*3) and put them into my PC.
- >
- >However, the new SIMMs are marked KMM59256AN-10. Does the "10"
- >indicate that they are 100ns SIMMs? The 4MB already in my PC is
- >70ns.
-
- Yes, these are 100ns SIMMS. Definitely NOT recommended for a 486DX-33
- application.
-
-
- >
- >The PC seems to work as normal (I had to put the new SIMMs in bank 0),
- >but I wonder if the new SIMMs are too slow. If so, would any errors
- >be trapped by the parity error check (which I've enabled) or would
- >the files I'm editing/saving be destroyed without me noticing it?
- >
- >To summarize: If my PC *seems* to work ok, is the new SIMM's speed
- >ok, or can I expect errors in saved files?
-
- Some brands of SIMMS often are underrated (ie. are capable of higher speeds
- than the rating would suggest). Others are very marginal. (I had the
- opportunity to test some fairly large batches of different brands of SIMM
- modules with a calibrated stress tester that can push them down to 40ns).
-
- If I were you though, I would try to exchange them to get 70ns or faster SIMMS,
- or you'll be inviting trouble.
-
- If there is a failure you're most likely to experience lockup; or a PARITY
- ERROR and the system will freeze.
-
- Alex
-
- >
- >-KKC-
-