Ted, re: It seems that most people thought that Intel couldn't make DDR chipsets because of a RMBS-Intel agreement
That's not quite right. What the agreement says is that Rambus has the right to terminate its contract with Intel if Intel produces a high-speed memory interface that isn't Rambus. The figure used is 1gb/s I think, so technically, if Rambus wanted to argue, they could already take on Intel over the 815. If I were running Intel, I'd give them the old Clint Eastwood line on that one. Go ahead, make my day.
Allegedly there is a new agreement, the one I'm referring is in Edgar filings from the Rambus IPO. For the original agreement, see theregister.co.uk. Yes, it's the Register, but it contains a link to the edgar Rambus IPO filing.
9.2 Termination
(b) Rambus, at its option, may, in addition to any other remedies it may
have, terminate this Agreement on written notice to Intel if (iv) at any
time between January 15, 1997 and the Success Determination Date,
Intel communicates to any of the then current top ten (10) DRAM
manufacturers that Intel has plans to support, as the primary DRAM for
PC main memory applications for the years 2000, 2001 and 2002, any
New Interface other than the Rambus-D Interface Technology; or (v) at
any time between January 15, 1997 and the Success Determination
Date, the Intel senior member attending the quarterly Rambus/Intel
executive meeting, upon Rambus' request, does not represent to the
Rambus officers attending such meeting that the Rambus-D DRAM will
be the primary DRAM for PC main memory applications for the years
2000, 2001 and 2002.
(i) For purposes of this Subsection (b), "New Interface" means any
interface for PC main memory applications, other than main memory
interfaces on Intel's chipsets shipped prior to the second calendar
quarter of 1998, and evolution of such main memory interfaces
extending therefrom. Any DRAM interface which provides greater than
one (1) gigabyte/second/device bandwidth is considered a New
Interface.
Digging that one up, I stumbled on this older story, theregister.co.uk , which isn't exactly consistent with the newer one. Maybe Mike Magee could comment on it. Hi Mike!
Cheers, Dan. |
