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 (32924)	10/26/1999 12:15:00 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Hi Dan3; Well you have certainly convinced me that you're a high level guy. Or at least that I'm a low level guy. After staring at your numbers for a while, I believe I see the pattern you are seeing. But you are making leaps of logic that I have trouble following. You should cut the rest of us some slack, most of us don't read benchmarks for a living. So I'll try and put it in my own words... Total time required to do a task by any given combination of memory and processor is a sum of the time spent waiting for the processor to do something plus the time spent waiting for the memory to respond (more or less). As you speed up the processor, the speed of the memory becomes more critical. So if you have a much faster memory technology, it should shine best at the highest processor clock rates, relative to systems with slower memory. On the other hand, the numbers from Sharkey's do not show a steady improvement in the RDRAM system as the processor clock knob is torqued up. I suppose that in the past, when you had an improvement in memory technology, that improvement showed up best at the higher clock rates? Perhaps you have some figures showing what the scaling looked like with SDRAM versus EDO? -- Carl