🚀 go-pugleaf

i942299@redgum.bendigo.latrobe.edu.au (Loon) writes:

>Cathleen M. Prather (pratherc@river.it.gvsu.edu) wrote:
>: In article <1/NsvokI5k5X083yn@cs.tut.fi> s106275@cs.tut.fi (Anssi Saari) writes:
>: >The DCA2 is nice, but EDRAM is very expensive, you can only put 16M of
>: >it on the board and there is no Pentium motherboard which could use it.

>: EDRAM is NOT "very" expensive.  It's only a couple dollars more per meg, and
>: you get a four-fold performance increase.  8M = $345

>plus of course, you don't have any cache ram which is not particularly
>cheap is it?

You do have the standad 256k cache that comes with the motherboard. The
DCA2 dosent use it unless you put Noral 70ns ram onboard. The motherboard
has 2 Dynamicache slots (72pin) which can accept up to 16mb each (32mb total)
& has two 'Normal' memory slots for 70ns RAM (which is cached)
The motherboard can never be *slower* than a normal 486/66, but it dosent
mean it's always faster. It's also no use running any speedtest programs
on it, because they all use the cache, which is as fast as the external dynamicache.. It's just as if you have 8mb of cache memory, thats all.
I have had my DCA2 for over a month now, & had no problems with it. It has
performed faster than any of my friends computers (who have normal m/b's)
& they even commented on how faster it 'responds'..
In short, if you think about it, *how*, in theory, can it be slower?