cactus@zardoz.club.cc.cmu.edu (Todd Masco) (06/21/91)
In article <1991Jun20.223220.19325@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> jdickson@jato.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Jeff Dickson) writes: > The speed difference between ROM and FAST RAM is not great enough >to justify having to load kickstart each time the blasted thing crashes, At what speed are the ROMs accessed? I'd expect them to be 7MHz, which would show a clear loss against my 25MHz SCRAM. Also, I don't have to reload kickstart at any time other than when the system powers up. > I only have 3 megabytes of memory on my A2000. I could add relatively >inexpensively another 6 megs to my A2058, but I don't need to. Three megs is >enough. The idea of a 1/2 megabyte of RAM being eaten up, doesn't tickle me >silly and I strongly doubt would it owners of Amigas with less memory. > > IMHO, there are no wins, just losses. Hm. I've got an A3000 with 6 Megs, and there are times when I'd like to be able to jump from version 1.3 to version 2.0. Am I correct in thinking that this is more difficult with the ROM? (Currently, I hold down the mouse buttons while the system starts out, and select the OS version). I still wonder what, if any, wins I'd see with getting the ROM. The memory consumptions isn't a problem (it would be if it were chip -- 2 Megs chip is sometimes limiting -- I like many multiple screens). Note the followup header... -- Todd L. Masco - CMU Physics | "Free speech is the right to shout cactus@zardoz.club.cc.cmu.edu | 'theatre' in a crowded fire."
jdickson@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Jeff Dickson) (06/25/91)
In article <1991Jun21.165031.5887@zardoz.club.cc.cmu.edu> cactus@zardoz.club.cc.cmu.edu (Todd Masco) writes: >In article <1991Jun20.223220.19325@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> jdickson@jato.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Jeff Dickson) writes: >> The speed difference between ROM and FAST RAM is not great enough >>to justify having to load kickstart each time the blasted thing crashes, > >At what speed are the ROMs accessed? I'd expect them to be 7MHz, >which would show a clear loss against my 25MHz SCRAM. Also, I don't >have to reload kickstart at any time other than when the system powers >up. > >> I only have 3 megabytes of memory on my A2000. I could add relatively >>inexpensively another 6 megs to my A2058, but I don't need to. Three megs is >>enough. The idea of a 1/2 megabyte of RAM being eaten up, doesn't tickle me >>silly and I strongly doubt would it owners of Amigas with less memory. >> >> IMHO, there are no wins, just losses. > >Hm. I've got an A3000 with 6 Megs, and there are times when I'd like >to be able to jump from version 1.3 to version 2.0. Am I correct in >thinking that this is more difficult with the ROM? (Currently, I hold >down the mouse buttons while the system starts out, and select the OS >version). > >I still wonder what, if any, wins I'd see with getting the ROM. The >memory consumptions isn't a problem (it would be if it were chip -- 2 >Megs chip is sometimes limiting -- I like many multiple screens). > >Note the followup header... >-- >Todd L. Masco - CMU Physics | "Free speech is the right to shout >cactus@zardoz.club.cc.cmu.edu | 'theatre' in a crowded fire." Well, maybe not this for you A3000 owners. I already posted a dis- claimer of this nature - didn't you bother to read it? And wakeup and smell the coffee. The amiga community does not revolve around the A3000! The A500, A1000, and A2000 have been around a lot longer and are a hell of lot cheaper! I understand that until C= puts 2.x in ROM, A3000 owners are kinda of stuck in the limbo between 1.3 and 2.x. Us A500 and A2000 owners do not have to hassle with a kickstart disk, because we have it in ROM. When A3000 users have 2.x in ROM, you'll understand where I'm coming from. Oh yeah... It was my understanding that on A3000's (or system's equip- ped with an MMU), ROM was moved into 32 bit memory. If that's the case, then the following is unfounded. >At what speed are the ROMs accessed? I'd expect them to be 7MHz, >which would show a clear loss against my 25MHz SCRAM. -jeff