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: pompsander who wrote (41633)	5/8/2000 11:55:00 AM
From: jim kelley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Right on Pomp! These FUDsters are peddling AMD and nothing else. They would not be here if they did not think that RDRAM was a very large threat to AMD. Otherwise, why bother? The "worthless technology" would disappear of its own ineptitude. They seem to feel that it is going to require a huge push off the side of a cliff. But here they (the AMD FUDsters) come and that speaks volumes about the new technology wave headed our way and their fear of it. AMD is losing the benchmarks now and that will get even worse with the release of Willamette. VIA is being relegated to a third tier player. JK

To: pompsander who wrote (41633)	5/8/2000 12:34:00 PM
From: Dave B	Respond to of 93625

Pomp, I remain amazed by the assumption that DDR will enter the marketplace as a "plug and play" technology. Yes the ABI (Anything But Intel) group conveniently forgets a number of issues and omens. First, you raise an excellent point. DDR was rejected by Intel back in 1996 so it's been around at least that long. How come they haven't gotten it to work yet? Second, DDR is a chip-level solution, not a system-level solution as RDRAM is. This will potentially cause a number of inconsistencies just as 100Mhz SDRAM suffered before Intel came along and bailed them out with the PC100 spec. Which leads of course to... Third, AMD has already disclaimed that not all DDR DIMMS may work correctly with their chip sets. That sure inspires confidence, doesn't it! DDR is going to be a mess. Dave

To: pompsander who wrote (41633)	5/8/2000 2:38:00 PM
From: Ali Chen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

Pomp, <The law of uninteded consequences has hit Rambus and Intel several times during development and rollout and the idea that DDR will simply appear in a bug-free, high-performance iteration does not wash with me. > There is nothing unusual with that. The DDR is _evolutionary_ technology. That means that all parts of the product gradually evolve form the current DRAM technology where huge engineering experience has been accumulated. The prior experience will be directly applicable because the changes in signals are not that big, and the problem if any can be quickly resolved with fast and smooth learning curve, with no unexpected issues. This is an advantage of "evolution" With the RAMBUS "revolution", people attempted the 8x jump in frequency. There was no experience in handling such frequencies in digital domain, the prior experience and intuition just did not work. Therefore the results. I am not saying that there is no one who can understand the problem, but the bulk of traditional digital designers, who actually do the job, seems to have little clues about reflections, impedance matching, and wave dispersions. And most of them probably never will, judging form the majority of responses on this and other threads. No one is saying that the DDR will be totally bug-free. However, above are the reasons why transition to DDR is expected to be much smoother and faster. Does it make sense to you now? - Ali