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 (42000)	5/11/2000 12:36:00 AM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Hi all; Re RMAbus. The motherboard return. While looking for the quote I used above where I stated that I wouldn't mind an RDRAM based computer, I found some posts I made at the time of the late September Camino fiasco that are appropriate to the current situation. (Forgive the grammar errors, it is difficult for me to proof while laughing.) This is what I wrote 3 weeks before the Camino crisis hit the fan: September 7, 1999 I forgot just how far off the scale this technology goes. This is not going to be pretty. ... Seeing this, I have to say that the rambus technology is pretty much doomed to have massive problems in yield and production, and probably problems in the field as well. I doubt that you will ever see rambus chips within 20% in cost to either PC133 or DDR. This will turn out to be one hell of an expensive blunder. #reply-11173315 From just after the halt, this post takes on new significance, given that it turns out that DELL has been shipping huge numbers of PC600 i820 boards in the Dimension B family. It also has something to say about the consequences of Intel having to eat those motherboards. September 28, 1999 It is a fact that more of the electronics industry is structured the way it is in order to simplify the task of deciding who has to eat scrapped product. In fact, the consequences of bad design are always forced back on the designers' company, in gate array design. I had done several chips before I detected this fact, but it is evident in the sequence of steps foundrymakes you go through before they put your design to fab. (For instance LSI Logic.) The Rambus business model allows themselves a certain distance from the fray. Basically, they can (and did) spec a bus with so little margin for deviations [See #reply-11373384 and links for S/H calcs.] that it just can't work reliably, but they don't get hit with anything other than a stock drop and lost future revenues. If I were the box makers, I would be beyond furious, as they are the ones that are eating product. I don't expect to see a lot of box makers formally dump RDRAM, but I will be surprised to see a lot of them announce products with it in the future. My own speculation, regards the design problem, is that they just plain ran out of timing margin, as a combination of a lot of parts not quite running to simulation. I expect them to take up underclocking, like they did with the PC100, as a solution. The PC100 ended up underclocked by something like 20%, so you are likely to see RDRAM running at 600MHz, maybe even 700 by the end of the year, but not likely production 800 MHz stuff. #reply-11380505 That was in response to this subtle and important post: "Comments and questions: Recent problem shows flaw in business model that does not allocate significant expense to service licensees." #reply-11380448 Now there has been a lot of material get eaten by a lot of companies due to Rambus' excessively tight margins. And Rambus didn't have to pay a dime for what was their lack of engineering judgement. But it all comes back to what design engineers think of Rambus, and it is not a pretty thing for the future of that company. -- Carl P.S. Also these gems: Jurassic park and testing stuff into working condition: #reply-11371551 Blood, mucus and feces: #reply-11364213

To: Bilow who wrote (42000)	5/11/2000 12:37:00 AM
From: jim kelley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Carl, It is not the RDRAM that is having the problem. It is that darn SDRAM.

To: Bilow who wrote (42000)	5/11/2000 4:02:00 AM
From: John Walliker	Respond to of 93625

Carl, The MTH chip has two interfaces, an SDRAM interface (using standard industry signalling levels) and a Rambus channel interface (using Rambus' RSL signal levels). Of those two, the SDRAM interface is old technology, we learned how to make those bullet proof a long, long time ago. So the noise problem is undoubtedly happening on the RSL bus. The RSL bus interconnects the i820 to the MTH. And it very likely has a signal integrity issue in the MTH design. In the long run, this is not a good thing for Rambus. It basically shows that Intel had trouble making an interchip connection using Rambus' RSL technique. You are guessing. Neither of us knows which bus is causing the problems at the moment. John