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: Dan3 who wrote (27298)	8/20/1999 9:02:00 AM
From: Jdaasoc	Respond to of 93625

Dan: <<Remember when Microsoft was telling everyone that OS2 was next year's platform and Windows was a short term transition product?>> What is your twisted point? You are becoming the most amusing thing on this board. In 1991 when the 16/32 bit GUI operating system and the Microsoft/IBM software wars were going on, your analytical reasoning went as far as deciding if it was Cherrios or Frosted Flakes for breakfast. You are either working your short position very hard or still don't understand the any of the reasons behind the SDRAM/DRDRAM debate now. Which is it.

To: Dan3 who wrote (27298)	8/20/1999 1:37:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

<It's the only test out there. I haven't heard any "we're waiting to see if there's a substantial performance improvement" from the rambus cheering section, just a bunch of vague claims for huge performance increases.> First of all, being the only test out there doesn't mean it's representative of actual performance. Once again, can you guess why there is a need for non-disclosure agreements? (By the way, you ought to know that Tom himself is going out on a limb these days, jumping onto the rabid Athlon advocacy bandwagon, and treating Intel once again like an "evil empire." Is it any surprise that the guy feels more than willing to publish a false data point regarding Rambus performance?) And second, I've already corrected those who think Rambus will show an increase in performance across the board. But they support Rambus for many, many other reasons, such as low pin-count, ability to handle multi-sourced traffic, and most importantly industry support behind the technology. <My own expectation is that rambus 800 will modestly outperform PC133, once all of the final tweaks and fixes are in. Rambus may even equal VC133 in overall performance.> And to think that you were complaining about a "bunch of vague claims for huge performance increases." If the above two sentences of yours aren't vague claims themselves, then I'd sure like to see a side-by-side comparison from which you draw your conclusion. (No, I don't consider your old "A is same as B, C is 33% faster than A, therefore C is only going to be 33% faster than A" argument to be a valid one.) <Remember that other sure winner, microchannel?> Oh boy, I love it when people bring up the old Microchannel argument. When Intel introduced its Slot 1 form factor for the Pentium II, there was a lot resistance to it. People claimed that Intel is once again trying to control the market for motherboards, that Socket 7 is the easier, cheaper, and more compatible solution, that AMD is doing the right thing in staying with the huge base of Socket 7 motherboards, yada yada. They compared Slot 1 to Microchannel and predicted that Slot 1 will suffer a same demise because the industry will never follow! Well, guess what? Socket 7 is pretty much dead now, Slot 1 motherboards are extremely high volume now, and even AMD is going their own slot route and introducing their Slot A form factor, which reuses parts from the Slot 1 form factor! So much for the "Microchannel" argument. Sound familiar to the campaign against Rambus? It's the same song-n-dance all over again. Tenchusatsu

To: Dan3 who wrote (27298)	8/20/1999 2:34:00 PM
From: John Stichnoth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Guys, (Dan3 and Tenchu) Maybe a step back is needed. First, I believe it has been agreed that Tom's Hardware Guide is an interesting, but unreliable, source. Tom's attitude is to question Intel; to be their sceptic. That's fine, but recognize his point of view and take his results with a grain of salt. Tom's value is to help raise questions, not to provide answers. Second, The question is not necessarily whether Rambus provides an edge on a current generation chip, whether pre-production or production. It is what box-makers will be putting into their machines in this and following generations. With the major box-makers all lining up to produce their newest and best machines incorporating rambus, we have our answer. Ultimately, the performance edge will be important, but that will likely occur as we move to faster and faster CPU's--from 600MHz to 800MHz and beyond. And it is in these faster models, appearing next year, that we will see the real performance edge. And while I'm not contesting either of your assertions regarding September chipset results, I haven't heard any contradiction to the assertion that RDRAM provides the better migration path. Best, JS