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: TST who wrote (31814)	10/8/1999 9:42:00 AM
From: Allen champ	Respond to of 93625

Posted 08/10/99 1:52pm by Pete Sherriff (The Register) Camino to appear in Q1 2000, says Intel Coppermine based Pentium IIIs will hit speeds of almost 800MHz sometime in Q2 next year, according to the latest leaks from Chipzilla?s roadmap. Internal Intel charts show a 733MHz (133MHz FSB with a 5.5x clock multiplier) part aimed at systems in the $1.5 - $2K price range and a mysterious '7XX' part for systems in the over $2K bracket. It doesn?t take a rocket scientist to calculate that a 6x multiplier would result in a speed of 798MHz. Due to ongoing Camino misery, Intel has pulled the venerable 440BX chipset off the train to the gulag and now plans to keep selling the Seattle 2 mobo well into Q2 next year. Although only a 100MHz FSB board, the latest BIOS rev already enables the SE440BX-2 to support the first Coppermine PIIIs up to 700MHz. The troublesome Camino i820 chipset is now targeted for early Q1 2000 with the 810e entry-level chipset being pushed upmarket to support midrange systems as well as cheap ?n? cheerful Celeron boxes. We confidently predict that the 820 to fail to appear in this timescale ? prove us wrong, Intel.. Little Celeron is billed to hit 566MHz by Q2 next year in systems costing between $900 and $1,000. Chipzilla sees the cheapest Celeron boxes costing less than $799 with a 500MHz processor. Evidence of continuing chipset woes can be found at the high end too, with 4 and 8 way Xeon systems being limited to a 100MHz FSB while faster 133MHz FSB parts will only run in dual processor configurations. PIII Xeons will hit 750MHz at 100MHz FSB and 1Mb or 2Mb level 2 caches for quad capable systems, while if two processors are enough for your needs, you can have an 800MHz 133FSB part with 256K of on-die cache. Real power freaks wanting 8way systems costing more than $50K will still be stuck with a 100MHz FSB and a relatively leisurely top speed of 550MHz until at least the middle of next year. ©

To: TST who wrote (31814)	10/8/1999 9:56:00 AM
From: JimLeo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

Less 11,000 shares traded in the first 20 minutes? Who's on vacation?

To: TST who wrote (31814)	10/8/1999 10:43:00 AM
From: grok	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

RE: <Your assertions about Rambus & Intel are interesting, but lets for the sake of fairness take Intel out of the picture. Now I ask you, has Sony's engineers Or Nintendo's engineers or all the other non-Intel companies who have or will use Rambus Drams, been suckered.> My last post dealt with some of these issues. Rambus does look like a good choice for PSII. The Game market is one where the evolutionary process doesn't work. The reason is that Game software people write code that is not portable so you can't enhance the Game hardware over the life of the product. These products have four year life times so they've got to freeze the hardware for four years. SInce DDR wasn't available they could not have used it. Also, PSII is just about the best possible use for Rambus with granularity and high bandwidth requirements being very important. But I don't think that the entire PC industry should be put through the wringer in order to build up volume for Sony. RE: <KZ is this really all about Intel, are there not many many other players here. Isn't there to much at stake for everyone to be forced by Intel to do something up to & including cutting their own throats? Does Intel really have that much power, so much in fact that companies up to & including Sony would jump on a sword when ordered? Are they blinded to information & facts that you know, but they do not?> The real controvercy comes about because Intel is trying to force Rambus on the entire PC industry. I have no problem with Intel deciding to support Rambus and offering chip set support. The entire issue comes down to one thing: "Intel is trying to force it on the industry." I wouldn't even be here making these posts if Intel had just offered Camino in two versions, one for Rdram and one for PC133. Let the best product win. That is the natural order of things.