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 92.35-0.4%3:59 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Scumbria who wrote (40444)4/20/2000 1:11:00 AM
From: Tenchusatsu  Read Replies (4) of 93625
 
Scumbria, that foil is rather interesting, isn't it? Here's some interesting points that I gleaned off that foil:

1) The crossover point of latency between Via/PC133 and 820/RDRAM is 375 MB/sec. With Via/VC133, the crossover point is 450 MB/sec. I can't imagine those figures to be a level of saturation for a 133 MHz FSB.

2) The 840 chipset w/ PC800 RDRAM has an average latency that's 50 nsec better than that of 820. That's almost seven FSB clocks. And this advantage is constant throughout the entire bandwidth spectrum. Certainly this can't be achieved by simply adding just another RDRAM channel. That tells me that something is abnormally crippling the performance of 820.

3) The 840 chipset w/ PC600 RDRAM performs very well, better than 820 w/ PC800 RDRAM. For a power-user, it might be cheaper to go with the former setup than the latter.

Any thoughts?

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