Article View: comp.sys.intel
Article #31SRAM vs DRAM (was: how better 60ns DRAM over 70ns)
From: Keith Smith
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1992 04:18
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1992 04:18
19 lines
1513 bytes
1513 bytes
In article <68457@cup.portal.com> drchip@cup.portal.com (MYRON A LIEBERMAN) writes: >15ns DRAMs > >Where do you propose to obtain 15ns DRAMs? Until recently the fastest made >was a 53ns DRAM manufactured by NMB Semiconductor. Last year several >companies have announced the development of 40ns DRAMs, but that would >appear to be the fastest. While 15ns SRAM is readily available, the need >for refresh makes DRAMs more challenging to produce at low access times. Speaking of which. My first computer used SRAM because it was easy to implement, and inherently faster (no refresh). My question is why no one makes a Generic 386/486 that doesn't USE dram at all, but only SRAM. How come we don't have SRAM SIMM? You should be able to buy SRAM at about 4 times the cost of DRAM. That means you could get a dramatic performance boost for the expense of some extra money in RAM. <sigh>. -- Keith Smith uunet!ksmith!keith 5719 Archer Rd. Digital Designs BBS 1-919-423-4216 Hope Mills, NC 28348-2201 Somewhere in the Styx of North Carolina ...
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Oct30.041806.3484@ksmith.uucp>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!rde!ksmith!keithReferences:
<1992Oct20.190045.2441@rz.uni-jena.de> <jpyp5vm@lynx.unm.edu> <68457@cup.portal.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel,to.rde Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!rde!ksmith!keith From: keith@ksmith.uucp (Keith Smith) Subject: SRAM vs DRAM (was: how better 60ns DRAM over 70ns) Organization: Keith's Computer, Hope Mills, NC Date: Fri, 30 Oct 92 04:18:06 GMT Message-ID: <1992Oct30.041806.3484@ksmith.uucp> References: <1992Oct20.190045.2441@rz.uni-jena.de> <jpyp5vm@lynx.unm.edu> <68457@cup.portal.com> Lines: 19