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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (83300)	12/16/1999 6:40:00 PM
From: Petz	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1581770

Tench, thanks for the enlightening post. One quibble, you said, The reverse is actually true. RDRAM, in general, is much better equipped to handle such random traffic than SDRAM because of the multitude of banks that can be accessed concurrently. How much is a multitude of banks? Each open bank draws more current than the rest of the memory. Thats why i820 and i840 had to reduce them. I'm just saying that a multitude of banks might not be enough, you might need two or four multitudes to handle hundreds of tasks. My prejudice as an engineer has always been to dislike solutions that don't gracefully degrade as their design limits are reached. You are right that cost and possible limitations on memory size are more important impediments to RDRAM in server-land. Its clear from the tomshardware.com review of the OR840 motherboard that streaming data applications can benefit significantly from RDRAM :-) but can they get the cost down to something reasonable? :o( Petz