Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watcgl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!watcgl!jchapman
From: jchapman@watcgl.UUCP (john chapman)
Newsgroups: net.works,net.micro.16k
Subject: Re: 32032 UNIX
Message-ID: <1237@watcgl.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 11-Feb-85 17:00:38 EST
Article-I.D.: watcgl.1237
Posted: Mon Feb 11 17:00:38 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 12-Feb-85 04:54:29 EST
References: <357@topaz.ARPA> <320@terak.UUCP>, <278@petrus.UUCP> <5040@utzoo.UUCP>
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 10
Xref: watmath net.works:905 net.micro.16k:196

> Another relevant question is, does your memory have zero wait states?
> People I trust tell me that the 32016's performance deteriorates
> *SHARPLY* when wait states are introduced -- it's much worse than
> you would expect, and in particular it's not linear in the number of
> wait states.
> 
  On the otherhand (at least according to my old 16032 manual) you
  wouldn't need very fast memory to keep up with a 32016 say about
  400ns access?