2 Nov
1997
2 Nov
'97
9:55 p.m.
I disagree with both of you. 300ns is more like the 70's to me. Even the
1982 IBM PC XT had 200ns RAM. A year later adding a third to that figure
makes no since. But 300ns might be right; as I would KILL for 30ns RAM in
a Pentium 233!!!! Even the fastest EDO RAM (Slightly outdated, but still
recent) is at 50ns; so 30ns makes ZERO sense.
----------
From: Tim Shoppa <shoppa(a)alph02.triumf.ca>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: Help Identifying RAM Chips
Date: Monday, November 03, 1997 5:35 AM
Your chip #1 is a 64k chip speed of 30ns, chips
2&3 are 256k at 150ns
speed.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I disagree with the 30ns figure; why the heck would a Compaq
Portable from 1983 have 30ns RAM in it? 300ns seems
far more likely, and is perfectly consistent with the numbering
from manufacturers of that era.
The last set of tell the the size and speed (64-3 and
256-15). John
>I have two original Compaq Portables, both of which are giving POST
>errors when they boot which indicate bad RAM. I have gone through a few
>...
>Chip #1:
>Hitachi
>1818-3006
>Japan 8332U
>HM4864P-3
Tim. (shoppa(a)triumf.ca)