home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
- Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!agate!stanford.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!homer.cs.mcgill.ca!uriel!storm
- From: storm@uriel (Marc WANDSCHNEIDER)
- Subject: Re: 1x9 vs. 1x3 memory
- Message-ID: <1992Sep13.010146.7258@cs.mcgill.ca>
- Sender: news@cs.mcgill.ca (Netnews Administrator)
- Organization: SOCS, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
- References: <1992Sep9.180601.11141@unislc.uucp> <1992Sep11.164957.5227@ultb.isc.rit.edu>
- Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 01:01:46 GMT
- Lines: 27
-
- In article <1992Sep11.164957.5227@ultb.isc.rit.edu> ajb8886@ritvax.isc.rit.edu writes:
- >
- >That's the first I've heard of 1MB*3s. What you're really referring to is
- >the fact that they use 1mb*4 bit chips instead of 1mb*1bit chips on the sim.
- >
- >On an older 1mb * 9 sim, you would have nine discrete 1mb chips.
- >
- >On a newer 1mb * 9 sim, you would have two 1mb*4 bit chips (= to 1mb * 8)
- >+ one 1 mb * 1 chip (sometimes they actually use a 1mb * 4 chip here too),
- >for a total of three chips.
- >
- >It should make no difference whatsoever: both types of simms are 1MB * 9 bits,
- >just packaged differently. The result should be transparent to the computer.
-
- A lot of people with older motherboards seeking SIMMs have had problems
- using the 1MBx3 Chips. However, I just recently plugged 1MBx3 SIPs into
- a two year old 386SX and there were no problems, so I would suspect that
- the board would have to be VERY old...
-
- ToodlepiP!
- Marc 'em.
-
- --
- storm@cs.mcgill.ca McGill University C program run. Run
- Marc Wandschneider Montreal, CANADA Program run! PLEASE!
- "When 900 years old you reach, look as good you will not." - Yoda
- "Ow!" -J.F.K.~
-