Hi Jdaasoc; Re: "AMD762MP chipset, INTEL upcoming chipset for servers and SERVERWORKS DDR products only use registered DDR memory."
None of those chipsets are designed for mainstream desktop usage, they're very high end stuff (like servers and very high end workstations). I believe that mainstream (and value) computers use more memory than high end systems, and that the prices of memory used by desktop computers is therefore more important. In addition, it is a common observation that servers tend to use trailing, not leading, technology. So for first indication of the takeover of the mainstream memory technology, I will use unbuffered DDR.
If you want to chart registered memory pricing, go ahead. I'm not stopping you. It's free, for God's sake. What's preventing you from generating the data??? The fact is that you just don't like to have to see DDR taking over the market, so you'd rather the data be more pleasant for Rambus.
Registered DDR will take over the market that registered SDRAM now fills, not the market that unbuffered SDRAM fills. But the market for registered SDRAM is considerably smaller than the market for unbuffered SDRAM, so why would I want to chart registered prices?
The only reason I can find for your silly insistence that registered is more important than unbuffered (in the face of my posting such voluminous evidence that both the memory makers and the chipset makers are concentrating on unbuffered DDR) is that you want to get a better comparison between DDR and RDRAM.
This is an unfair comparison. In order to get maximum density DDR (or SDRAM) memory, you have to go to registered parts. With RDRAM, on the contrary, you use the same RIMM modules, but since you are severely restricted to how many modules you can put on a channel, you have to add repeater modules.
By comparing the price of registered DDR to the price of RDRAM you are making an unfair comparison, unless you include the price of the repeater circuitry. What you want me to do is to compare prices in a way that is unfair to DDR.
To make the comparison even worse, you will undoubtedly also want me to use a very small module size, where registered DDR wouldn't even be used. Large size RDRAM modules are extraordinarily expensive or nonexistant.
If I wanted to compare prices for server memory, I'd be inclined to use 1GB modules, but there are no RDRAM modules that size, and in any case I couldn't get decent pricing information from my available sources (particularly PriceWatch).
None of this really matters because we both know that DDR has already shut RDRAM out of the large memory market. Why would I need to plot that price series? Everybody should already know that servers went DDR. What memory does the Itanium use?
Basically, you're just another Rambus loser who wants to look at the world by squinting. If you screw up your eyesight bad enough, you can sort of imagine RDRAM not being dead, dead, dead. Take a good look at what you're saying. You want me to use registered pricing because of three chipsets, one of which is available only on motherboards from Tyan that cost $400 bare, the other two of which are not available at all. You're a loser. You don't even make sense.
-- Carl
P.S. Re: "You are some piece of work you smug bastard." You got that right. Notice that painful feeling in the pit of your stomach? That's cause you're invested in RMBS. Get rid of that POS and you'll feel a lot better. |
