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: FJB who wrote (98793)	3/17/2000 10:53:00 AM
From: Pravin Kamdar	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571332

Bob G., Good to see that you are still around. Are you an AMD investor? It would be nice to see you on this thread more often. Regards, Pravin.

To: FJB who wrote (98793)	3/17/2000 11:35:00 AM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1571332

Intel 820-Based Motherboard Sales Flop on Chipset Flaws, High Costs nikkeibp.asiabiztech.com; Robert, The link is a bad one...I get an error reading....can you check it and repost it. Thanks. ted

To: FJB who wrote (98793)	3/17/2000 11:55:00 AM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571332

Dissecting Rambus www7.tomshardware.com Meanwhile, from the good Dr. Tom, via a Register citation, more documentation of the big favor Intel is doing AMD with the Rambus push. This article isn't as good as the performance comparison of the 820 vs. the BX overclocked to 133 FSB, but it's a lot funnier. Some choice bits, for entertainment only: By the way RDRAM's bus is double-pumped meaning that it transfers data on the rising and falling edges of clock pulses. Accordingly PC800 is fed by a 400 MHz clock. Less intuitively, as stated in our recent article, PC700 actually runs at 712 MHz double-pumped from a 356 MHz clock. To insure that there is no logic to RDRAM speed ratings, PC600 real speed is 532 MHz triggered by 266 MHz clock. . . . Along with imposing charges to manufacturers over practically every aspect of RDRAM technology from RDRAM chips to RIMM slots to memory controllers, the agreement that manufacturers must sign also binds them to a gag order preventing them from criticizing RDRAM. Because of this, much of the information about manufacturing problems has had to come second or third-hand. . . . Dell is perhaps the world's largest manufacturer of personal computers. Dell is also widely considered closely wedded to Intel. On the computer titan's site, the speed of the RDRAM used in its systems is difficult to find and, for the typical consumer, difficult to interpret. After drilling down to the RDRAM specifications for the Dell XPS B, the computer giant provides information that is not only misleading, but also simply false. Dell boasts that "RDRAM provides up to 1.6 GB/sec of memory bandwidth versus only 800 MB/sec with conventional SDRAM," but elsewhere on this page the frequency of the RDRAM used in the system is stated at 356 MHz. As already explained in this article, this indicates in an indirect way that the system is equipped with the slower PC700 RDRAM which will never reach a bandwidth of 1.6 GB/sec. Also on this page Dell states correctly that the bus width for its RDRAM systems is 16 bits, but it also states that SDRAM's bus width is only 8 bits when, as you already know, SDRAM has a 64-bit bus. Incorrect at best, misleading at worst, Dell should be harshly criticized for providing this disservice to its customers. In light of other misinformation currently surrounding RDRAM, Dell's actions are cast in an unfavorable light. . . . The flaccid performance of Rambus RDRAM, is no secret to Intel. At the September 1999 IDF, Dell had prepared a now infamous study showing that in all but one of its tests using MS Office, SDRAM significantly out performed RDRAM. Intel quickly snuffed this presentation, but not before news of it escaped. And just for the road, a masterpiece of alliterative headline writing, except that maybe Elmer ought to go into FUDD mode and suggest to higher-ups it ought to be relaunched as "Wambus". Wait, Won't Wiley Willamette Work Well With Rambus? Oops, missed the thrilling conclusion quoted in the Register: theregister.co.uk He concludes: "Given Thomas Pabst's latest tests showing that RDRAM actually degrades system performance while doubling the system price, from our vantage point Rambus does not have much to recommend it." © On a more serious note, this article cites the following refs that have been brought up here previously by, er, somebody: realworldtech.com . x28.deja.com , plus Tom's big article on the BX at 133 FSB, www7.tomshardware.com . All very entertaining, I say, and good for AMD too. Not that AMD should count on Intel's assistance here forever, but in the short term, it sure helps. Cheers, Dan.