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: CatLady who wrote (37267)	2/16/2000 7:21:00 PM
From: IceShark	Respond to of 93625

No. And that question will start a huge argument. -g-

To: CatLady who wrote (37267)	2/16/2000 7:23:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

CatLady, <Are DDR and RDRAM supposed to be equal in performance?> I think it will be. DDR running at 266 MHz is supposed to have a higher theoretical bandwidth than RDRAM at 800 MHz, but RDRAM is more efficient at utilizing its bandwidth. So in general, I'd expect the performance of both DDR (at 266 MHz) and RDRAM (at 800 MHz) to be roughly equivalent. The funny thing is the appearance of DDR running at 200 MHz, which will NOT be competitive with RDRAM-800. The anti-Rambus coalition tosses up FUD about RDRAM not being able to yield at the full 800 MHz, which is why the 600 and 711 MHz speed grades (also known as PC600 and PC700, respectively) were created. Now why are all these DDR samples being produced at both 200 and 266 MHz? Could it be that DDR might be a little tougher to yield at the full 266 MHz than once thought? Tenchusatsu