mb,
I am not a techie but understand the basics. I do rely on information I read to help me make decisions. Here is a technical response to some of your q's. It is worth reading IMO. I hope it helps.
I didn't mean to sound snitty, I just think you won't be convinced, nor will I (unless INTC drops RMBS, then I am outa here!)
To: +Cirruslvr (60575 )
From: +Tenchusatsu Friday, Jun 4 1999 4:46PM ET
Reply # of 61108
In short, JC's post, intended to correct some inaccuracies in a ZDNet article, actually has many inaccuracies of its own. Here are some of them:
"So, basically, 400MHz RDRAM is equivalent to 100MHz SDRAM."
There's some confusion over RDRAM's clocking and data transfer rate. It's clock runs at 400 MHz, but everything is double-pumped, so the actual data transfer is at 800 MHz. And 800 MHz over a 16-bit wide datapath has twice the throughput of 100 MHz over a 64-bit wide datapath.
"600MHz DRDRAM can be used for the 133MHz bus speed."
This is a confusing statement, partly due to the confusing specs on Camino. Camino's processor bus is 64-bit and 133 MHz, leading to a memory bandwidth of 1.06 GB/sec. Camino's memory channel is 16-bit and 800 MHz, leading to a memory bandwidth of 1.6 GB/sec. This means there is more memory bandwidth than the processor bus can handle, but that's OK since AGP and PCI also access memory in a DMA fashion.
As for 600 MHz DRDRAM, I personally don't think this is an issue any more. It would have been had Camino been released this month, but thanks to the delay, more DRAM foundaries like Samsung will have time to ramp-up full-speed 800 MHz RDRAM RIMMs.
"[DDR SDRAM] is faster, cheaper, easier to update to from regular SDRAM because of similar technology, and it's not controlled by a single, monopolistic company."
And it's vapor. Only two months ago did the "anti-Rambus" coalition scrap SLDRAM in favor of DDR SDRAM. And DDR's progress is well behind that of DRDRAM. I don't feel like bringing up articles to support this, but I'm sure some of the guys in the RMBS thread will be more than happy to do just that.
Plus, the transition isn't as easy as the anti-Rambus coalition makes it out to be. DDR SDRAM will run into electrical issues, like greater number of pins (so much for an easy update from current SDRAM technology) and stability concerns rising from trying to double-pump data across a "stubby" memory channel.
Finally, DDR SDRAM at 266 MHz (133 MHz double pumped) may boast of a higher theoretical bandwidth than 800 MHz DRDRAM, but DRDRAM makes better use of bandwidth than any form of SDRAM because of the larger number of banks and the packetized protocol. So I wouldn't be surprised if the actual throughput of DDR SDRAM is no better than that of DRDRAM.
"..."
And the rest of the post is just your regular "Rambus is DOA, DDR SDRAM is a sure thing" ranting that provides me with more buying opportunities for the volatile RMBS stock.
Tenchusatsu
|
