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: Bilow who wrote (40021)	4/15/2000 5:57:00 PM
From: Scumbria	Respond to of 93625

To: Bilow who wrote (40021)	4/15/2000 6:20:00 PM
From: John Walliker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Carl, I would guess that the average FET has a low enough on resistance to make the design work. Where they would run into problems is in the spread of the process. RDRAM has got to require a relatively tight process. One of the nice things about Rambus is that the FETs don't have to be terribly accurate. There is a calibration process at startup that adjusts each device to give the correct current for whatever bus impedance the system designer has chosen to use. It is only when RIMMs are used that there is any need to standardise on a 28Ohm impedance so that devices from different manufacturers can interwork. But you know this already. John

To: Bilow who wrote (40021)	4/15/2000 6:44:00 PM
From: Ali Chen	Respond to of 93625

Carl, <there are no simple solutions, or one-line answers to engineering. Requiring tight tolerances raises the cost of production. Reducing pin counts reduces the cost of production. Which is more important?> I contend that the answer is pretty clear. The cost of reducing or increasing the pin count is simply proportional to the count: same pins, same proven traces, etc. In contrast, requiring high tolerances escalates the cost in multiples: it cost to control each: materials, photoplotters, etching, lamination process, component variability, soldering variability, etc. Pumping up frequency as high as 8 times the current technology escalates the cost dramatically. Even property of materials are impossible to find for those frequencies, so additional cost of characterization is required. Take in the cost of 3GHz-range testing equipment, top of the available in the whole industry. So, you know the drill... I see the answer is clearly not in favor of Rambus approach - pin saving goes down linearly, but higher frequency costs grow exponentially. - Ali, with no Rambus agenda. Just wondering.