SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Rambus (RMBS) - Eagle or Penguin
RMBS 92.37-0.4%3:59 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Scumbria who wrote (40444)4/20/2000 12:34:00 AM
From: jim kelley  Read Replies (1) of 93625
 
Re: SDRAM versus RDRAM latency

You are pointing out the only positive for your argument.
Everywhere else the chart shows SDRAM to be at a disadvantage to the RDRAM 820 and 840 systems.

The cross over point for RDRAM is about 425 MBS bandwidth versus the pc133 sdram in the Apollo BX. Note that other SDRAM systems had much higher latencies than the 820 or 840 RDRAM system. After that the SDRAM in the Apollo BX flounders and it is never able to achieve the 800 MB/sec bandwidth.

This chart shows clearly why INTC chose RDRAM.It also shows clearly that the dual channel RDRAM 840 board show a significant decrease in latency from the single channel RDRAM 820 system at the higher bandwidths.

JK

Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext