weiss@mott.seas.ucla.edu (Michael Weiss) (05/25/91)
In article <3218@shodha.enet.dec.com> m_herodotus@csc32.enet.dec.com (Mario Herodotus) writes: > Personnaly I don't care how Apple does it but I want the capabability >to address 128M of memory just like the advertising that persuaded me that the >IIcx was my best choice promised, and just like the specs in my IIcx manual >claim. I don't care what form they do this in but I want what I paid for! On another note, I understand that with 24-bit addressing, you can address up to 16MB of RAM (2^24 is about 16MB), but why is it only 128MB for 32-bits? 2^32 comes to about 2GB. Am I to understand that as 32MB SIMMS come out, and then 64MB SIMMS, etc., that the ultimate limit is actually 2GB? Or is there some other limitation that is keeping it at 128MB? -- \ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | / - Michael Weiss weiss@watson.seas.ucla.edu | School of Engineering and - - izzydp5@oac.ucla.edu | Applied Science, UCLA - / | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | \
rwyckoff@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (richard wyckoff) (05/25/91)
Michael Weiss (weiss@watson.seas.ucla.edu) writes: >On another note, I understand that with 24-bit addressing, you can address >up to 16MB of RAM (2^24 is about 16MB), but why is it only 128MB for 32-bits? >2^32 comes to about 2GB. Am I to understand that as 32MB SIMMS come out, and >then 64MB SIMMS, etc., that the ultimate limit is actually 2GB? Or is there >some other limitation that is keeping it at 128MB? a) yeah, what're the other bits wasted on? b) 2^24 ie *exactly* 16 M, and each address (in this case) is of a byte (right?). c) 2^32 is *exactly* 4 G. <a "k" in computerese is not 1000 (as in Kilo), but 1024 (as in 2^10)> Rich