From: ralph on
On Thu, 27 May 2010 18:53:45 -0400, "Mike B"
<mDotByerley(a)VerizonDottieNettie> wrote:

>"ralph" <nt_consulting64(a)> wrote in message
>> On Thu, 27 May 2010 16:24:37 +0100, MM <kylix_is(a)> wrote:
>>>>Not since the ancient days of expanded/extended memory managers and
>>>>mixed memory modules can I remember a case where increased RAM
>>>>degraded performance. (You can reach a point of diminishing returns,
>>>>but *backwards*??? <g>)
>>>>Enjoy the adventure.
>>>Don't forget that Windows 98 doesn't 'like' 1gb of RAM! In fact, you
>>>HAVE to tweak system.ini else it won't boot.
>> I didn't know that. I haven't had a PC with less than 2gb of RAM since
>> my first 386. And certainly never used Win98 with less.
>I would've liked to see that MoBo capable of holding 2gb in 1986. Remember,
>the memory chips were press-in, not on pcboards.
>I ran my manufacturing business on a PC Limited (before it was called Dell)
>386 with 2mb of RAM and a PC-MOS operating system (multiple DOS memory
>partitions mapped to Wyse terminals).
>The TI-286 that it replaced had a 1.0mb expansion card (on top of the base
>640k) that was a $2500 option, so I'm thinking 2gb of memory then would've
>been a bank buster..

My memory may very well be faulty.

I'm trying to remember exactly what my original 386 had.

It was a custom built tower by a computer shop. It is likely I'm
confusing the number of cards, as well as megabyes with gigabytes - as
when I first got it - I vaguely remember 128k increments which were
later replaced with 258k increments. (Or was it 258s replaced by 512s
???). Anyway - the math doesn't work out. The box was huge, but not
that huge. And I had money back then, but not that much. Your "2mb"
number seems far more realistic.

I vaguely remember there were addressing issues, not all the memory
could be used directly, and it was an odd lot - that is not 2, 4, 8,
but something like 3, 5, ... . It also gets confusing since the box
was converted to a Venix workstation with additional newer hardware.

All I really remember was it had two 80mb Seagate HDs, two floppy
drives, a Colorado Tape drive, and that free CD drive MS gave away to
Consultants, and literally a rack of cards inside (a graphics card, HD
card?, a 'stacker drive' card, a sound card, memory cards, ethernet
card, ...) and the base price was $3600 (monitor, tape,
sound/speakers, not included <g>).

[And also my prized Hayes Smartmodem, which I believe was a hefty
chunk of change all by itself. <g>]

So yeah, I'll agree with you - I'm probably full of it.


From: MM on
On Fri, 28 May 2010 01:19:25 -0500, ralph <nt_consulting64(a)>

>My memory may very well be faulty.

Try Kingston. It's always worked for me... ;)

From: ralph on
On Fri, 28 May 2010 08:11:42 +0100, MM <kylix_is(a)> wrote:

>On Fri, 28 May 2010 01:19:25 -0500, ralph <nt_consulting64(a)>
>>My memory may very well be faulty.
>Try Kingston. It's always worked for me... ;)

From: Mike B on

"MM" <kylix_is(a)> wrote in message
> On Fri, 28 May 2010 01:19:25 -0500, ralph <nt_consulting64(a)>
> wrote:
>>My memory may very well be faulty.
> Try Kingston. It's always worked for me... ;)
> MM

Yeah, these days, were it only true you could do that....

From: Jim Carlock on
"Helmut Meukel" <Helmut_Meukel(a)> wrote:
: Ralph,
: I *do* remember such cases. There was an Intel chip-set which didn't
: buffer all memory. Increasing memory degraded memory performance.
: Helmut.

And then the BIOS settings needed to get fiddled with. 80ns, 60ns and
so one with perhaps 120ns memory chips needed some attention. I think
the timing specifications went up to perhaps 180ns or 240ns even, just
depending upon how far back you want to gander.

I am thinking back to the early- to mid-1990s at this moment when I
worked for a computer store and was calling people in China looking
to buy memory directly from China (or rather that little island that
the British owned(?) -> Hong Kong).

Windows 3.x ran on various versions of DOS (some not owned by MS).

Sales people pushed a wide variety of memory managers back then, both
for "extended" memory and the "expanded" memory managers. I stayed
away from anything that dealt with "expanded" memory. I always ended
up with too many head aches from trying to get "expanded" memory to
work properly.

Jim Carlock