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 : Micron Only Forum
MU 242.33-4.3%3:42 PM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Carl R. who wrote (42135)1/16/1999 1:45:00 AM
From: eabDad  Read Replies (2) of 53903
 
Carl R-

I'm long TER exactly because the RDRAM ramp expected.

However, your die size penalty numbers for RDRAM need refinement. At 64mb it is 13-15%, at 128mb it is 8-10%, and for 256mb it is less than 5%. With the increased package and test costs, price per bit compared to 64mb SDRAM will be at least 30% for the preferred 128mb version right now.

Exactly which PC OEM will buy DRAM at a 30% price premium? None I can think of.

Oh yeah, Intel will force this ... not. RDRAM not needed in workstations or for PCs less than $1500 this year. If Intel tries to force this, Mr Dell and Mr Compaq may seek Mr AMD and Mr Cyrix. Intel would not want that. Intel is not stupid, and they will provide a cost effective SDRAM alternative in the end.

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

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News