[comp.sys.mac] SIMMs, CMOS vs non-CMOS

delbarre@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (kelvin.a.delbarre) (11/28/89)

In an earlier article, I asked about the differences between CMOS
and non-CMOS chips, and whether the observed difference in prices
quoted by Chip Merchant and Technology Works was justified by their
claims to be selling non-CMOS and CMOS SIMMs respectively.  (By the
way, Chip Merchant sells what they have on hand, which varies from
day to day, and presumably so does Tech Works, so this distinction
may not hold if in fact it ever did.)

I received three email replies.  To summarize:  CMOS chips tend
to be fast.  In general, they have low power consumption
and thus produce less heat.  This is more of an issue for
a Mac Plus than (say) a Mac II.  CMOS is also especially
sensitive to static discharges, so if you're installing them
yourself, use static protection to avoid frying them.
Respondents questioned whether the phone 'droid at Chip
Merchant knew that the chips she was selling were non-CMOS,
or just *didn't* know that they *were* CMOS (i.e. it wasn't
down there on the product list) so said they weren't.
I consider that a distinct possibility, especially since one
person had just purchased 4 Meg of C.M. SIMMs and they were
definitely CMOS! (Samsung 80ns fast-page 1Mbit x 8).

Many thanks to Bill Taroli (WWTAROLI@RODAN.acs.syr.edu),
Alex Lau (franny.berkeley.edu!c8s-an) and Mark Wilkins
(wilkins@jarthur.claremont.edu) for their helpful comments.
I'll go with C.M. and save about $19/Meg.

	Kelvin Delbarre
	attunix!kd