I can't absolutely say for sure from a techinical aspect, but I very (x20)
much doubt that this is true based some very logical deductions. A lot of
high end P2 systems already ship with 128 megs of RAM with options to add
more when you by the system. Check out some of Dell's systems. Even the a
lot ot the P2 laptops can be expanded to 144 megs. Again, Dell lists prices
for RAM upgrades to their laptops to this capacity. They would give prices
for it if it couldn't be done. It would be really bad PR to have people
calling and trying to order the laptop w/ 144 megs or RAM only to have the
customer service rep tell you it wouldn't do any good. Of course, this is
not to mention the piles of lawsuits manufacturers like this would face if
they were adding RAM that couldn't be used. Based on this, I think it's safe
to assume that your reliable source  isn't so reliable.

On a site note, your source might be getting confused with some of the
original computers that used SDRAM. Again, to site Dell as an example, I
know their early SDRAM systems (mostly P200 and P233) could not use more
than 64 megs. But even then, it was a limitation of the board and not the
processor. Which, at my last glance at the technical specs (which has been a
while) x86 processors back to the 486 were theoreticaly capable of using 4
terrabytes of RAM. Funny thing though, I don't think anyone ever tested
this. I wonder why?


>I heard something today from a supposedly reputable and knowledgeable
>source that frankly I am having trouble believing, so I bring it to this
>expert court of public information...
>
>According to my source, there is a little known limitation with current
>Pentium II processors that allow them to recognize or address a limit of
>64Megs of RAM. This despite the fact that many high-end Pentium IIs are
>advertised as being expandable in the RAM department to much higher
>amounts. Could this be a case where the Pentium II motherboards will accept
>higher amounts of RAM, but somehow the excess over 64Megs is not recognized
>by the CPU?

<snip>
>Can anyone shed light on this? I am not gullible, and I don't believe
>everything I hear, but, as I said this comes from someone who I used to
>think was very knowledgeable. Is he???
>
>TIA.
>
>Michael
--
Adam Gonsman
[log in to unmask]