Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kash johal who wrote (83285)	6/12/1999 3:51:00 PM
From: Tony Viola	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Kash, RDRAM to cost $400 for 256Mb. In the industry, Mb means megabit and MB means megabyte. You had me sweating for a few seconds there. also, article says: said a 128-megabyte memory subsystem stocked with Direct RDRAM will cost between $200 and $250 this year, possibly dropping to less than $150 by the end of 2000. So why are you extrapolating out to 256 megabytes? Because $400 has better shock value? finally: More bad news for Intel I'm afraid. Intel is handing AMD a killer opportunity now lets see if they have the "killer" instinct I'm not saying much ado about nothing, but, still, I think you and the article are overstating the importance of this. Starting at 600, rather than 800 MHz is probably a damn good idea for getting a good handle on the transmission line characteristics they're dealing with, although it may be more a decision based on yield, or bin split in CPU terms. Only 600 MHz, indeed! Man, that's practically crawling! And, as was discussed here before, what's the overall system performance degradation going from 800 to 600 MHz RDRAM? Is it measurable? The Christmas thing, yes, I can see that, but, what change does a mobo need to go through to support 800, after being set up for 600 MHz. A crystal oscillator output, what else? BIOS? OK, nothing is trivial. Have to admit that the Rambus story is the best ongoing high tech soap opera in quite a while. Tony

To: kash johal who wrote (83285)	6/12/1999 3:59:00 PM
From: grok	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

RE: <Some DRAM vendors said that by withholding support for 800-MHz Direct RDRAM in the 820 chip set, Intel is ensuring PC makers will buy the slower-running 600-MHz chips, which are "down-binned" devices that fail to meet the timing specifications of 800-MHz Rambus. Since early RDRAM yields will be heavily weighted toward the slower-speed devices, Intel is in effect creating a market for chips that otherwise might be passed over by PC makers looking for more performance.> This sounds like the actions of a monopolist dictating to the market. But to force 600 MHz Rambus down the throats of box makers who don't want Rambus in the first place will just make Coppermine less appealing. Just what Intel needs with K7 looking good. In fact, this makes even K6 look better! Intel had better find a rabbit to pull out of the hat very quickly or this will go down in history as the Great Rambus Fiasco of 1999.

To: kash johal who wrote (83285)	6/12/1999 5:50:00 PM
From: Cirruslvr	Respond to of 186894

Kash - RE: "At an investment conference in San Francisco last week, Farhad Tabrizi, director of strategic marketing for memory products with Hyundai Electronics America's Semiconductor Division, in San Jose, said a 128-megabyte memory subsystem stocked with Direct RDRAM will cost between $200 and $250 this year, possibly dropping to less than $150 by the end of 2000. Typically, PC OEMs allocate less than 10% of their budget to main memory, Tabrizi said, which would limit Rambus to higher-end PCs well into 2000." At Pricewatch.com, 128MB of non-generic-PC-133 RAM by Corsair is only $156. Imagine how much lower prices will be when the generic stuff comes around. BTW, the PC133 chips are made by Micron, whom Intel invested $500,000,000 with the aim of helping them w/DRDRAM.