??? 05/21/04 15:07 Read: times |
#70844 - RE: Memories Responding to: ???'s previous message |
The reason is that DRAM is cheaper than SRAM
Not really, if we are talking '51 apps. a 'typical' 128k SRAM can be had for ~$2 and the smallest DRAM I know of is >$10. If you use 47k, the SRAM is $2 and DRAM is $10. That hardly makes DRAM cost effective. Erik |
Topic | Author | Date |
Memories | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Memories | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Memories | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Memories | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Memories | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Memories | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Memories | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: MMU - Jacob | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Memories | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Memories | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Memories | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Memories | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Memories - Rob | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Seriously, now: DRAM vs SRAM | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Seriously, now: DRAM vs SRAM | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Seriously, now: DRAM vs SRAM![]() | 01/01/70 00:00 |