Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: Is Intel exceptionally unsuccessful as an architecture designer? Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2024 21:32:00 -0000 (UTC) Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 10 Message-ID: References: <2935676af968e40e7cad204d40cafdcf@www.novabbs.org> <21028ed32d20f0eea9a754fafdb64e45@www.novabbs.org> <20240918190027.00003e4e@yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2024 23:32:01 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e114a577b81d0eff5431452080854aaa"; logging-data="1331451"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+CaPLWiaWu98mmWwFF1yw4" User-Agent: Pan/0.160 (Toresk; ) Cancel-Lock: sha1:Ch54JlmWZml2OYl7QlbXL0/gH0c= Bytes: 1745 On Fri, 20 Sep 2024 11:21:52 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote: >> The basic issue is: >> * CPU+motherboard RAM -- usually upgradeable >> * Addon coprocessor RAM -- usually not upgradeable > > Maybe the RAM of the "addon coprocessor" is not upgradeable, but the > addon board itself can be replaced with another one (one with more RAM). Yes, but that’s a lot more expensive.