SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Bilow who wrote (39440)4/9/2000 11:22:00 AM
From: Scumbria  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 93625
 
Carl,

I know that you take a lot of bashing on this thread, but speaking as a relatively unbiased observer, I can say that the technical information you present seems quite accurate. I'm not very familiar with the financials, so I will reserve comment about that.

Scumbria



To: Bilow who wrote (39440)4/9/2000 12:49:00 PM
From: Scumbria  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 93625
 
Carl,

The reason for SDRAM not showing up immediately into the main memory market were similar to the reason that RDRAM had problems, latency.

The reason that SDRAM beat out BEDO as the memory of choice for motherboards, was because it made system design much simpler. BEDO's asynchronous interface made the small latency gain not worth the trouble.

DRDRAM offers no such engineering advantage. Having fewer pins does not compensate for the high module cost. The latency is worse than DDR, and the bandwidth is no better. There is no rational engineering reason to put DRDRAM on a motherboard. Intel is locked into DRDRAM for political reasons, but I'll bet that there are a lot of people at Intel who wish they could get away from it.

Scumbria



To: Bilow who wrote (39440)4/9/2000 5:53:00 PM
From: John Walliker  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 93625
 
Carl,

What I did say was that RDRAM would be plagued by high cost, (not necessarily high price, mind you), difficult manufacturing, reliability issues, and lack of price/performance. All of these things have come to pass.


What makes you so sure these things will not happen with DDR, especially when one attempts to scale the speed much higher?

Intel's current difficulties are an example.

What difficulties, exactly?

In fact, the MVP3 chip set from quite some time ago

So why isn't everyone using it?

John



To: Bilow who wrote (39440)4/10/2000 10:53:00 AM
From: Dave B  Respond to of 93625
 
Carl,

Hi Dave B; I never, ever said that RDRAM would never, ever work. I never said that you would never see them in systems under $2000.

Never said you did. But beginning in Feb 1999 (when the delay from June to Sept was announced) there were a slew of anti-Rambusites who did. Mostly Burkies.

What I did say was that RDRAM would be plagued by high cost, (not necessarily high price, mind you), difficult manufacturing, reliability issues, and lack of price/performance. All of these things have come to pass.

PC Magazine just published their benchmarks of 8 850MHz and 1GHz systems and the RDRAM-based systems won all 15 tests except 1. Do you think Compaq, HP, Polywell, etc. are going to look at those results and say "Oh, it's okay if we come in second." Don't think so. As for the pricing, let's talk in a year. You keep harping about it at this point in time when in fact no one has ever argued about the fact that it was going to be expensive at the start. So none of the things you predicted have come to pass when you take the long view.

My guess is that eventually the cost of RIMMs will stabilize at somewhere between 1.5 and 2 times the cost of DIMMs. This is in keeping with other industry estimates for the ratio.

Carl, you are just plain in outerspace with this statement. Don't you read this board? There are multiple posts of articles with quotes that the pricing differential will get much lower, all quotes from manufacturers and industry analysts. Your estimates are completely unfounded.

A year ago I thought that the above pricing would have come about long before now, at least by the end of last year

Why would it do that when no one was even building it into systems until Dec/Jan? A year ago we all thought systems would be shipping in July. Well, that didn't happen so changing your expectations is a reasonable thing to do. Based on our aggressive space program in the 60s I thought we would have landed somebody on Mars by the end of the century. Oops. We didn't do that, but does it mean we'll never do it? No! It's just a delay, just as the price declines in Rambus are. Having to explain something this obvious seems like a waste of typing -- you should know better.

I am not at all unreasonable, nor have I seen the posts you are talking about, the ones that stated that RDRAM would never work. Please provide some links to comments on this thread to that effect, I don't think they exist.

Unfortunately I have not bookmarked the last 15,000 or so posts. You are welcome to find them. But as anyone here can tell you, I am not into hyping RMBS when I'm long nor tearing it down when I'm flat (as I am right now). Unlike some, my integrity is extremely important to me. If you don't think they exist, you are welcome to find them -- they are in fact there. Just because we're on opposite sides of the RMBS fence doesn't mean I'm going to make s**t up.

Dave