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 : Rambus (RMBS) - Eagle or Penguin -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kash johal who wrote (24286)	7/8/1999 2:47:00 PM
From: MulhollandDrive	Respond to of 93625

>>Clearly if there is no advantage for current user applications then the company will crash and burn.<< Well there's your answer. RMBS will not Crash & Burn. bp

To: kash johal who wrote (24286)	7/8/1999 2:49:00 PM
From: Scumbria	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Kash, When technical Rambus longs like Scumbria/Tench are asked WHAT WILL BE THE PERFORMANCE GAIN OF RAMBUS OVER PC133 in Q4 99 they start backpedalling. I have never said that RDRAM offers any advantage on a traditional motherboard, in fact I have been quite vocal to the contrary. The advantage of DRDRAM comes into play for cards/systems that can take advantage of multiple ports to memory. I expect to start seeing a lot of those next year. Scumbria

To: kash johal who wrote (24286)	7/8/1999 3:11:00 PM
From: TST	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 93625

Kash, clearly Intel would not stake her future on an untested design with no appreciable advantage to PC's or anything else. They simply aren't that stupid & neither is Rambus for that matter. I would be willing to bet that only the engineers who have spent many a year on this know what they are doing & know far more than those who are not involved & inside these two companies.

To: kash johal who wrote (24286)	7/8/1999 4:00:00 PM
From: J_W	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Kash, Now folks like IBM have stated that RDRAM doesn't buy anything over PC 133 memory. Please post a link to this statement. I would like to know who said this and under what conditions there are no advantages. Tom Pabst has tested camino with 800Mhz RDRAM and seen no appreciable performance gain. We have discussed Tom Pabst's test results here in the past. His credibility rating is about a 2 on a scale of 10. Just read his bio. He makes no effort to hide his bias against Intel. tomshardware.com He seems to be more interested in overclocking than anything else. The fact that he has gone to school and become a medical doctor tells me that he is only interested in computers as a hobby. He says his tests used the B0-stepping of the Camino chipset. He further states: tomshardware.com Please be aware of the fact that Camino is not optimized for the highest performance yet. Now how much debug code is present in that version - who knows. Is this a good indicator of the finished product? Probably not. That is the crux of the problem facing all of us right now. There are no published creditable test results of Camino out yet. And we will probably not see any until the Intel Developers Forum Aug 31st. I believe anyone having a test Camino chipset also has signed a non-disclosure with Intel. If someone knows different, please correct me. Regards, Jim

To: kash johal who wrote (24286)	7/8/1999 4:32:00 PM
From: Dave B	Respond to of 93625

Kash, We're just going to have to politely agree to disagree here. I personally don't believe that Rambus could have fooled all of the engineers at all the companies that have announced so far that they're using RDRAM, and kept them fooled for so long. If Rambus had no advantage, these guys would have backed out long ago. That's pretty insulting to call them all that stupid. Other have addressed some of the problems with your statements (e.g. Tom Pabst, etc.), but let me add that your statement about IBM was misleading. After the Electronic News article appeared, IBM specifically said that they would be building RDRAM-based systems. The rumor that started the entire IBM brouhaha was that the Microelectronics group would not be producing RDRAM. And, as we identified at the time, IBM is not a force in DRAM production, so who cares? Also, I am not sure where you're getting your cost estimates for RDRAM since the DRAM companies (LG Semicon, Samsung, and Hyundai), in a recent article, said that the incremental cost of RDRAM would be 10%-50% (not sure if the top end was that high). That's right from the horse's mouth so I'd use those numbers long before I'd use numbers from Tom Pabst or Electronic News. If it's 25% more expensive, a $200 to $400 bump in the price to the user would imply that you're saying that there's $800 to $1600 worth of SDRAM in a PC, which is obviously way out of line. Good luck with your investing strategy. Dave