Tony, RE: " Personally, I think the "Rambus advantage" is way overblown, and definitely not worth the headaches, both in the technology, and politically with the DRAM vendors and the OEMs. The advances in cache memory and impending DRAM on chip make Rambus a don't care. Intel doesn't need them."
Sounds as if AMD thinks Rambus might be needed at higher Mhz:
pcworld.com
Not sure if this came off the Intel thread or the Rambus thread. Forgive me if it's a repeat, but here's a quote:
"In the quest for even more speed, sources say AMD is also looking into using RDRAM (Rambus DRAM) in future Athlon processors. While a more expensive memory solution that requires the user to pay licensing fees, RDRAM outpaces DDR SDRAM by a considerable margin.
Officials for Santa Clara, Calif.-based Intel, which has been AMD's chief rival, said Friday that the company's next-generation Pentium IV processor will likely ship with RDRAM. (See "Intel Still Believes in Rambus." )
The URL is for an InfoWorld article by Dan Neel, dated
October 27, 2000.
My point was that it's hard to believe everything Intel has been saying lately because Barrett and others have said so many different things. It's hard not to notice that the conflicting stories seem to depend more on what Intel wants at the moment rather than any objective analysis.
If Intel bet their future on the D team, that doesn't say much about management's judgment. I thought that Intel performance reviews would assure stockholders that the D team is working on someone else's problems, not Intel's.
dmf
BTW Rambus isn't my real concern. Intel's credibility is. |
