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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (40344)	4/19/2000 1:03:00 PM
From: KeepItSimple	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

"YOU ARE SO FULL OF IT, I AM STUNNED!!" >Oh, and by the way, CAS2 PC133 does not handily beat RDRAM, despite >what Tom Pabst claims. A properly-designed 440BX chipset running at 133 >MHz would run substantially slower than Tom's overclocked system. OH MY GOD! Do you work for Clinton? Do you realize how transparent your BS is in that statement? A "properly" designed 440BX system running with PC133 ram would be "running" at 100MHZ, according to intel!!! Since intel refuses to officially support anything faster than PC100, Tom had to overclock a BX setup. I literally cannot believe how clintonese your statement was. Yes, a "properly" designed BX setup running at 133mhz would run slower, because the damn thing would be running at 100mhz !! Please tell me you didn't actually believe nobody would call you on your egregious attempt at obfuscation. Either that, or you really do think everyone here is too dumb to notice.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (40344)	4/19/2000 1:13:00 PM
From: Ali Chen	Respond to of 93625

<A properly-designed 440BX chipset running at 133 MHz would run substantially slower than Tom's overclocked system.> Why are you still peddling this nonsense over and over again? The Tom's system runs. It completes all tasks _successfully_, and it runs fast. This is the fact. Therefore it _proves_ that there is nothing wrong with the chipset _logically_. The only question is how wide the stability margins are, and will they fit into manufacturing variability. If the margins are slim, "properly-designed" silicon may and will improve the little timings if any. BTW, many overclockers have run their i440BX at speeds up to 170+MHZ FSB. Now tell me that there are no margins at 133. In short, PC-133 SDRAM on 440BX is better performer than 820+RDRAM for typical PC workloads.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (40344)	4/19/2000 2:08:00 PM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

Tenchusatsu, while RDRAM's low pin count makes it more desirable for desktops and workstations. Didn't I just read here that the next generation of RDRAM is going to double the pin count? Besides, as I said elsewhere, having to spend additional $800.00 instead of $800.25 for 128 MB or memory compared to the same amount of SDRAM makes the argument beyond ridiculous. Oh, and by the way, CAS2 PC133 does not handily beat RDRAM, despite what Tom Pabst claims. A properly-designed 440BX chipset running at 133 MHz would run substantially slower than Tom's overclocked system. Via chip, which was never a great performance chip compared to BX matched the performance of RDRAM, running in-spec in properly designed system. If look at the comparisons of Via chip and BX running at 100 MHz, you wuold see how much slower the chipset is. I think Intel will have to cripple the 815 chipset to keep RDRAM in the running performance-wise. But in the long run, the Rambus albatros will make Intel shareholders pay dearly. Joe