> -----Original Message-----
> From: PCBUILD - PC Hardware discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Rick Poepping
> Sent: February 26, 1998 23:59
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [PCBUILD] RAM vs Cache -upgrade ques
>
>
> I'm getting ready to do various upgrades to my 586-p133 and I would like
> to know the relation of Cache and RAM.  Specifically, how much RAM can
> 512K cache?  And what benefits and pitfalls are there to going beyond

        Depends on the chipset, for Intel's TX and VX 512K will cache 64Megs, with
the HX if you have the extra TAG SRAM you can cache up to 512Megs (wow!)

> that amount (of RAM).  I've heard all kind of things -like: Win95 uses
> the highest memory addresses first, so if you have more RAM than you can
> cache, you'll always be operating out of the cached area (to begin with,
> at least)  and so on.  Can anybody help?  Is this exactly the same for
> laptops?

        WIN95 is the opposite, it loads from the bottom up. Other OS's such as NT
and OS/2 load from the top down. About the only thing that will happen
without cache is a slightly slower system sometimes, look at about a 5%
loss. Try it, turn off you secondary cache (in the BIOS) and see if you even
notice the slowdown, you probably won't. TTYL