Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!nntp.coast.net!col.hp.com!news.dtc.hp.com!canyon.sr.hp.com!darrylo
From: darrylo@sr.hp.com (Darryl Okahata)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Parity SIMMS really necessary?
Date: 4 Dec 1995 20:54:17 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard / Center for Primal Scream Therapy
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <49vn5p$i7i@canyon.sr.hp.com>
References: <49lbnr$4fq@interport.net> <49qabp$efi@zuul.nmti.com>
Reply-To: darrylo@sr.hp.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: mina.sr.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2.2]
Peter da Silva (peter@nmti.com) wrote:
> I'm obviously naive. I had no idea they even *made* non-parity SIMMs.
>
> The whole idea of putting that much memory in a box without at *least*
> parity (and preferably ECC) makes me sick in the stomach.
In that case, you'd better be aware that, currently, *MOST* Pentium
systems being sold DO NOT CHECK PARITY. In fact, they cannot check
parity because the chipset they use (Intel's Triton I) does not and
cannot check parity. Intel's Triton I chipset is one of the most-used
Pentium chipsets.
You can imagine the complaints brought up by various people ....
Unfortunately, the "low-cost" solution wins out in the uninformed PC
marketplace ....
Intel's new Triton II chipset supposedly supports parity, as well
as ECC. The word on the street is that Triton II motherboards may not
be available in quantity until February or so, although, rumor has it,
a few might be available this month. [ No, don't ask me where -- I have
no idea. ] However, to support ECC, we may have to buy 40(?)-bit
memory, as ECC supposedly needs two (2) extra bits per byte, while
parity needs only one. I hate to think how much that'll cost ;-).
-- Darryl Okahata
Internet: darrylo@sr.hp.com
DISCLAIMER: this message is the author's personal opinion and does not
constitute the support, opinion, or policy of Hewlett-Packard, or of the
little green men that have been following him all day.