KZNerd, <Can you really make any clear statement that demonstrates that the evolutionary approach could not keep up with these future killer apps if they do, in fact, actually happen?>
Yes. Rambus is clearly a better solution than even DDR SDRAM. The only thing DDR SDRAM has going for it is low cost and a less complicated memory controller design. DDR has its own problems, such as large pin count and inefficient use of the memory channel.
<Tench, The dram industry moved from PC66 to PC100 because it was a free upgrade due to normal Moore's law scaling just like the one currently underway to PC133.>
Let's back up a little. Why did the industry shift from EDO DRAM to SDRAM? If I recall correctly, SDRAM provided very little benefit over EDO at the time. It was certainly costlier and tougher to implement, and the web sites were recommending that people not go all out and swap their motherboards just to get SDRAM.
The answer is obvious. SDRAM, with its clock synchronized to a common clock from the memory controller (hence the 'S' in SDRAM), was a much better and forward-looking solution that the asynchronous signals of EDO or FPM DRAM.
One coworker of mine, an engineer (i.e. not a marketing guy), said that when you transition memory technologies, you always have to go over a big hump. And he's speaking from experience, too. EDO to SDRAM, PC66 to PC100, and now RDRAM. The only difference is that this time, people are trying to make that routine big hump look like the Berlin Wall.
Tenchusatsu |
