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 (27405)	8/23/1999 2:05:00 AM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

<The traces have to be the same length with rambus, they don't with PCXXX. It limits where you can put them and everything else has to accommodate those traces.> Dan, I have a hard time believing that you don't have to match trace lengths with PC100. In fact, I have a hard time believing that you don't have to match trace lengths of anything that runs faster than a 33 MHz PCI bus. Incidentally, DDR SDRAM will also have to match trace lengths as well, since data and strobes are source-synchronous and running at pretty high speeds. And with a 64-bit bus, that's no easy task. Tenchusatsu

To: Dan3 who wrote (27405)	8/23/1999 5:14:00 AM
From: John Walliker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Dan3 The traces have to be the same length with rambus, they don't with PCXXX. It limits where you can put them and everything else has to accommodate those traces. Look at the rambus tech docs. Modern pcb routing software is designed to cope with this requirement. I would also question whether a competent designer would use varying trace lengths for a PCXXX bus as this would lead to a timing nightmare with all the signals arriving at varying times. Haven't you noticed on many current motherboards there are signals which take meandering paths for no obvious reason other than to equalise propagation delays. John