Re: 560x v. 600

From: Paul Khoury (pkhoury_at_loop.com)
Date: Sun Apr 05 1998 - 03:17:30 EDT

• Next message: Paul Khoury: "Re: 560x v. 600"
• Previous message: Paul Khoury: "Re: 701: Warp Connect v. Warp 4"
• Maybe in reply to: richard: "560x v. 600"
• Next in thread: richard: "Re: 560x v. 600"
• Reply: richard: "Re: 560x v. 600"

On Sat, 4 Apr 1998 18:31:32 +0100, LPL wrote:

>I had a 560 with a 133 and 40 megs of RAM. Stolen recently. It was faster
>than my new 560X with 32 megs and a 233MMX. Now that I've added 64 megs
>more RAM to the 560X ($239 at CDW) it is fast and acceptable. Unreal!
>There's something wrong.
>
Believe me, adding RAM makes a HUGE difference in performance and speed.

When I upgraded this machine at first to 24MB, it was like I got a new machine
altogether. Even upgrading my desktop and server to 24MB also makes a huge difference
in speed (from 16 each).

-- 
Paul Khoury   <pkhoury_at_loop.com>  http://pkhoury.dyn.ml.org
Sent from my ThinkPad 701CS running OS/2 Warp 4.0, Fixpack 5
There are 19 Processes with 72 Threads.
This machine's uptime is 0d 2h 59m 40s 210ms.

• Next message: Paul Khoury: "Re: 560x v. 600"
• Previous message: Paul Khoury: "Re: 701: Warp Connect v. Warp 4"
• Maybe in reply to: richard: "560x v. 600"
• Next in thread: richard: "Re: 560x v. 600"
• Reply: richard: "Re: 560x v. 600"

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:53:59 EST