🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: demon.tech.pc
Article #68743

Re: Caught by cache?

#68743
From: John Beardmore
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 00:00
30 lines
1458 bytes
In article <317bc4ca.802017@news.demon.co.uk>, Hemal Popat
<hemal@popath.demon.co.uk> writes

>Just to confuse things further there's at least 3 types of Ram around:
>70ns DRams (which you might already have), 60ns DRams, and EDO Ram

And SDRAM and EDRAM...  ( No, I don't mean EDO ! )


> (I think
>this is rated as 60ns, someone correct me if I'm wrong?).

Just about all these technologies are fabricated for use over a range of
speeds. EDO probably comes faster than 60 ns these days but I doubt
anybody has made any slower than 70 ns. It is a 'go faster' variant
after all.


>So the quickest is EDORam+PB Cache, then things get a bit  hazy.

No. The quickest is probably EDRAM. This is about 10% more expensive and
much faster. A kind of cache in the simm technology with access times
down to less than 15 ns for consecutive accesses.

This is not exactly main stream, but you can buy these systems off the
shelf.

-- 
John Beardmore
Technical Details
Message-ID: <izdk3JArnVgxEwLG@wookie.demon.co.uk>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mail
References: <415183800wnr@draycot.demon.co.uk>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 1036bc,7858595a79b6a65d
X-Google-Attributes: gid1036bc,public
From: John Beardmore <wookie@wookie.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Caught by cache?
Date: 1996/04/27
Message-ID: <izdk3JArnVgxEwLG@wookie.demon.co.uk>
X-Deja-AN: 151620843
distribution: world
x-nntp-posting-host: wookie.demon.co.uk
references: <415183800wnr@draycot.demon.co.uk>
organization: the Saab graveyard !
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups: demon.tech.pc