>
>
>
> Original Message
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>Subject: Re: memory question (hardware)
>Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 16:27:07 -0400
>
>>Latency, risk of failure, sure... also sheer design complexity
>(since you have
>
On Sat, 5 Jul 2008 16:27:07 -0400
"Jeff Soules" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Jeff,
> to solve the geometry of fitting more circuitry in the same space),
True, but for memory that's easier than for, say, a CPU. Mainly
because there's a *lot* of repetition in RAM chips. As a result, a
fair b
:04 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Original Message
> >> >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> >To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> >> >Subject: RE: memory question (ha
Any thing else?
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 11:04 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Original Message
>> >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>> >S
t; >
> > Original Message
> >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> >Subject: RE: memory question (hardware)
> >Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 01:08:10 -0400
> >
> >>I am curious...
> >>
> >>
> >>When m
>
>
>
> Original Message
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>Subject: RE: memory question (hardware)
>Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 01:08:10 -0400
>
>>I am curious...
>>
>>
>>When memory is manufactured why does a stick of
On Wed, 02 Jul 2008 22:14:01 -0700
Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Paul,
> Smaller die size means higher price. You're squeezing twice as many
> circuits into the same real estate.
As a result, failure rate will be higher too, since greater density
leads to greater risk of error.
On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 01:08 -0400, Mag Gam wrote:
> When memory is manufactured why does a stick of 4GB memory cost 2.5
> times of 2GB memory? Is the manufacturing process that much different
> to justify the cost?
Smaller die size means higher price. You're squeezing twice as many
circuits int
Joe Hart wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tyler Smith wrote:
On 2007-02-13, Joe Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Here's my question. Why do the two different versions report different
a different amount of memory? The 32 bit version says I have a total of
886MB, where the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tyler Smith wrote:
> On 2007-02-13, Joe Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Here's my question. Why do the two different versions report different
>> a different amount of memory? The 32 bit version says I have a total of
>> 886MB, where the 64-bit ve
On 2007-02-13, Joe Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Here's my question. Why do the two different versions report different
> a different amount of memory? The 32 bit version says I have a total of
> 886MB, where the 64-bit version says there is 1024MB.
>
I came across this recently when I upg
I'm not very familiar with gtop, but top gives you the data right at
the top of its output (if display of memory information is enabled).
It tells you how much of your memory and swap is in use and how much
is used in buffers and caching.
You can also get all of this information (the Right Way) fr
On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 01:13:59PM +0200, Joerg Johannes wrote:
> I've got 512MB of RAM, and I wanted to see how much of it is free. So I
> ran gtop, which showed me that ~84MB are used (mainly X and apache-ssl).
> OK so far, but cat /proc/meminfo tells me that ~480MB are in use, and
> only 32MB fr
Bill wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> Can anyone tell me if there is a command that lets
> you know how much memory is used and or left available. If
> so what is it??
>
> Regards and thanks in advance
> Bill
>
"free" will do it for you. If you append it with "-m" (free -m) it
will show megabytes
14 matches
Mail list logo
