[irnbrumike]

Long story short, I have a 700mhz eMac with 768 megs of PC 133 ram.

I also have a G4 Cube with 384 megs of PC 100 ram.

I want the 768 in the Cube, and the 384 in the eMac.

I know you can put faster ram in the Cube, but will the eMac "see" the PC 100 ram?

THANKS!
mg.

[Ryan Becker]

Originally posted by irnbrumike:
Long story short, I have a 700mhz eMac with 768 megs of PC 133 ram.

I also have a G4 Cube with 384 megs of PC 100 ram.

I want the 768 in the Cube, and the 384 in the eMac.

I know you can put faster ram in the Cube, but will the eMac "see" the PC 100 ram?

THANKS!
mg.

Not sure about the eMac, but if you did that to the iMac, it would cause Kernel Panics.... I would think it would do the same to the eMac.

-Ryan

[CreepDogg]

If I'm not mistaken, the 700MHz eMac had a 100MHz system bus. I believe that means that PC100 memory would work in the eMac, and your switch would be fine. Good luck.

eMac Specs Here

[Ryan Becker]

Originally posted by CreepDogg:
If I'm not mistaken, the 700MHz eMac had a 100MHz system bus. I believe that means that PC100 memory would work in the eMac, and your switch would be fine. Good luck.

eMac Specs Here

The iMac has a 100mhz bus, and it needs PC133.

-Ryan

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by Ryan Becker:
The iMac has a 100mhz bus, and it needs PC133.

What are you talking about?

[Ryan Becker]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
What are you talking about?

My god you are a nuisance....

What part do you not understand!?

-Ryan

[Eug Wanker]

Ryan: The iMac has a 100mhz bus, and it needs PC133.

-----------

Eug: What are you talking about?

-----------

Ryan: My god you are a nuisance....

What part do you not understand!?

Look, if you don't know what you're talking about, then stop making believe that you do. iMacs and eMacs with 100 MHz busses do not require PC133 (although they should work fine with it).

iMacs with 100 MHz busses will work just fine with PC100 (obviously).

[Ryan Becker]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
Look, if you don't know what you're talking about, then stop making believe that you do. iMacs and eMacs with 100 MHz busses do not require PC133 (although they should work fine with it).

iMacs with 100 MHz busses will work just fine with PC100 (obviously).

Sorry, you are wrong!! I know this for a fact.

I was an official Helper over at Apple's Discussion Forums.

PC100 RAM in iMacs that require PC133 RAM will indeed cause Kernel Panics, and there is no debating this. It is fact.

Please stop following me trying to catch my mistakes... I know what I'm talking about.

-Ryan

[Strix]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
Look, if you don't know what you're talking about, then stop making believe that you do. iMacs and eMacs with 100 MHz busses do not require PC133 (although they should work fine with it).

iMacs with 100 MHz busses will work just fine with PC100 (obviously).

The 700Mhz eMac requires a minimum of PC133 to operate. See following from Apple, http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=88417, and for the history buff: http://www.theapplemuseum.com/index....amp;skin=specs

[Ryan Becker]

Originally posted by Strix:
The 700Mhz eMac requires a minimum of PC133 to operate. See following from Apple, http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=88417, and for the history buff: http://www.theapplemuseum.com/index....amp;skin=specs

Amen! Thank you Strix.

-Ryan

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by Ryan Becker:
Sorry, you are wrong!! I know this for a fact.

I was an official Helper over at Apple's Discussion Forums.

PC100 RAM in iMacs that require PC133 RAM will indeed cause Kernel Panics, and there is no debating this. It is fact.

Please stop following me trying to catch my mistakes... I know what I'm talking about.

As an "Official Helper" you really should know better.

You are mistaking the requirement of PC100 with tight CAS timings for a requirement of PC133. There are different speeds of PC100 RAM, some of which are better than others. If you use CL3 PC100 in some machines which require tighter timings, it will cause a kernel panic.

If one were to use PC133, however, you are less likely to run into issues since slow PC133 is still faster than fast PC100, hence Apple's suggestion of using PC133. They want to simplify it for people who wouldn't know about the various different types of RAM. The problem arises when users go and buy the cheapest PC100 available - that will cause kernel panics. However, if you buy RAM from a reputable source that knows about Macs (such as Crucial), PC100 will work just fine. Fortunately, most PC100 RAM you find in stores these days is CL2, not CL3.

So why use PC100 at all instead of PC133? Because some people may have fast PC100 from other machines (and the specs are often written right on the memory's label). Also, it used to be that fast PC100 was cheaper than slow PC133, but that is no longer the case in many stores.

[Ryan Becker]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
You guys are misinterpreting the requirement of PC100 with tight CAS timings for a requirement of PC133. There are many types of PC100 RAM, some of which are better than others. If you use CL3 PC100 in some machines which require tighter timings, it will cause a kernel panic.

If one were to use PC133, however, you are less likely to run into issues since slow PC133 is still faster than fast PC100, hence Apple's suggestion of using PC133. They want to simplify it for people who wouldn't know about the various different types of RAM. The problem arises when users go and buy the cheapest PC100 available - that will cause kernel panics.

However, if you buy RAM from a reputable source (such as Crucial), PC100 will work just fine.

As an "Official Helper" you really should know better.

OMG, you are so full of yourself. I don't know where you come from, but where I come from, we keep things simple, especially when trying to answer someone's question. If I got you on a tech support call, I would ask for someone else.

No one cares that you can make a certain type of PC100 work. Apple says PC133, so that's what I tell people to use. Telling them anything else only complicates the issue.

But, I can tell that you aren't trying to help the person with the question, you are only trying to prove to others how much you know. It's okay, a lot of people waste their time here doing that. But, don't bother me with that nonesense please, I'm here to help.

-Ryan

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by Ryan Becker:
OMG, you are so full of yourself. I don't know where you come from, but where I come from, we keep things simple, especially when trying to answer someone's question. If I got you on a tech support call, I would ask for someone else.

No one cares that you can make a certain type of PC100 work. Apple says PC133, so that's what I tell people to use. Telling them anything else only complicates the issue.

But, I can tell that you aren't trying to help the person with the question, you are only trying to prove to others how much you know. It's okay, a lot of people waste their time here doing that. But, don't bother me with that nonesense please, I'm here to help.

The guy has PC100 RAM already. You're basically telling him to buy new RAM because PC100 is automatically useless for an eMac 700, which is of course wrong.

Some of the PC100 RAM in his Cube may very well be PC100 CL2, depending upon when it was purchased. All he has to do is look on the label. If it is CL2 (eg. 8 ns), he doesn't have to buy new RAM. It will work just fine in the eMac. Now if it's older PC100 RAM it won't work, however.

[tooki]

It is bizarre: the developer's tech note (which is usually the Final Word on the hardware) does say it's a 100MHz memory bus, yet the RAM expansion section says

The RAM expansion modules for the eMac are 168-pin SDRAM DIMMs that are 3.3 volt, unbuffered, 8-byte, non-parity, and PC-133 compliant. The speed of the SDRAM devices must be rated at 125 MHz (8 ns) or faster.

125MHz is the same speed as PC100.

My inclination is that while PC133 is the listed requirement (and probably the only way to use >256MB modules), PC100 should work.

tooki

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by tooki:
It is bizarre: the developer's tech note (which is usually the Final Word on the hardware) does say it's a 100MHz memory bus, yet the RAM expansion section says
125MHz is the same speed as PC100.

My inclination is that while PC133 is the listed requirement (and probably the only way to use >256MB modules), PC100 should work.

Actually, early PC100 was as slow as 10 ns. I believe the Cube can use this. The eMac cannot, but will work with PC125 (aka PC100 CL2).

PC100 sold these days is actually 8 ns so it will work in the eMac. We don't know what RAM he has in his Cube though. The RAM should say on the label what speed it is, but if it doesn't, the chips might have something like -10 or -8 on them.

[l008com]

Both machines are rather easy to open up, and I know one way to find out for sure if it will work or not :-D. If 700 Mhz eMacs have a 100 MHz bus, then i'd say yea it will work. For a time PC133 was much cheaper than PC100 and backward compatible, which also could have influenced the recommended ram variety.

[l008com]

Originally posted by Ryan Becker:
OMG, you are so full of yourself. I don't know where you come from, but where I come from, we keep things simple, especially when trying to answer someone's question. If I got you on a tech support call, I would ask for someone else.

No one cares that you can make a certain type of PC100 work. Apple says PC133, so that's what I tell people to use. Telling them anything else only complicates the issue.

But, I can tell that you aren't trying to help the person with the question, you are only trying to prove to others how much you know. It's okay, a lot of people waste their time here doing that. But, don't bother me with that nonesense please, I'm here to help.

-Ryan

Theres only one person being a dick in this thread, and its YOU!

[irnbrumike]

Thanks, Ryan! You sort of gave me what I figured would be the answer anyways.

While I appreciate everyone else's comments (I really do!), I was really looking for a fool-proof solution... sounds like this isn't so no-brainer, and there seem to be a few "what ifs" involved. Perhaps I'm spoiled, but since moving to OS X, I have zero patience for things to not work perfectly, so the potential of a kernal panic kind of ended my need to pursue doing it.

Just looking for a "Yes" or "No," I probably should have been clearer--"Maybes" just never seem to work out for me with upgrades ;-)

In the end, I'm selling off the Cube! I'm not even going to attempt swapping the ram. (yes, both Macs are ridiculously easy to get under the hood of, but anyways..) Oh well.

It seemed like a good system to buy, but it's not cutting it for what I need it to do.

I do appreciate everyone's help.

[Ryan Becker]

Originally posted by irnbrumike:
Thanks, Ryan! You sort of gave me what I figured would be the answer anyways.

While I appreciate everyone else's comments (I really do!), I was really looking for a fool-proof solution... sounds like this isn't so no-brainer, and there seem to be a few "what ifs" involved. Perhaps I'm spoiled, but since moving to OS X, I have zero patience for things to not work perfectly, so the potential of a kernal panic kind of ended my need to pursue doing it.

Just looking for a "Yes" or "No," I probably should have been clearer--"Maybes" just never seem to work out for me with upgrades ;-)

In the end, I'm selling off the Cube! I'm not even going to attempt swapping the ram. (yes, both Macs are ridiculously easy to get under the hood of, but anyways..) Oh well.

It seemed like a good system to buy, but it's not cutting it for what I need it to do.

I do appreciate everyone's help.

You are welcome!

Maybe now these ego inflated tech heads will see that it's much more helpful to give a yes/no type answer, than it is to try and impress everyone with how many "what ifs and maybes" you can come up with.

That being said, I'm done here, my time is better spent in a place where people are looking to help people in need of help, and not wasting time trying to prove to eachother how much they know.

Everyone that battled me, please think long and hard about how this thread started, where you guys took it, and how it ended... then think about how you feel about what you are all doing here.

To anyone actually looking for help, go to Apple's Forums....

Later.

-Ryan

[Eug Wanker]

That being said, I'm done here

w00t!

[terminator]

Originally posted by Ryan Becker:
You are welcome!

Maybe now these ego inflated tech heads will see that it's much more helpful to give a yes/no type answer, than it is to try and impress everyone with how many "what ifs and maybes" you can come up with.

That being said, I'm done here.... bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla

Everyone that battled me, .....bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bal bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla.

Later.

-Ryan

Pot calling the kettle black. A real piece of work you are, Ryan. Mommy and daddy are calling. Better go.

[Ryan Becker]

Originally posted by terminator:
Pot calling the kettle black. A real piece of work you are, Ryan. Mommy and daddy are calling. Better go.

I'm the piece of work!? LOL, you are the one stalking ME, you psycho!

See if ya can track me down to the next forum I join....

Later, weirdo....

-Ryan

[terminator]

Originally posted by Ryan Becker:
I'm the piece of work!? LOL, you are the one stalking ME, you psycho!

See if ya can track me down to the next forum I join....

Later, weirdo....

-Ryan