more RAM + faster disk -> slower box?!

Sam Smith S at mSmith.net
Thu Nov 29 18:32:17 GMT 2001


On Thu, 29 Nov 2001, Paul Richards wrote:
> >> be a  public ceremony for Manchester BSDers in the Lass O' Gowrie where
> >> I will eat  my BSD horns and tail, date and time to be announced. :-)
> >
> > You're a gentleman, a man of your word, and you're going to get
> > indigestion.
> >
> > Apparently (thanks Sam) I need "registered DIMMs" (whatever they are) in
> > order for the board to cache more than 512MB. Our so-called engineers
> > knew nothing about this; I got the usual shrugs from them when I asked
> > about it. I mean,  I know I always get poor quality hardware, I just
> > didn't expect it to be  quite this bad...
>
> That makes no sense at all. Registered DIMMs have a register in them to
> help with bus loading i.e. you can stick a lot more RAM into a box that
> uses registered memory, it has no bearing on cacheability at all.

But if the Motherboard will only take 512Mb of non-registered memory,
and you put 756 in?



> Did I miss Sam's email somewhere?

It appears I only mailed Ian for some reason.

My mail consisted of a reference to:
http://www.cs.utk.edu/~labstaff/cluster/pdf/440BXAGPset.pdf (the
relevant chipset AFAICT)


and the words
" Note that the DRAM controller will only talk to 512 unless you
have "registered DIMMs"  "




Sam

-- 
  Sacrifice: Your Role may be Thankless, But if You're Willing to Give it
      Your All, You Just Might Bring Success to Those Who Outlast You.





More information about the Ukfreebsd mailing list