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 (43113)	5/28/2000 1:16:00 AM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Tenchusatsu, I would not trust the benchmarking of Bert McComas. I prefaced my quote in saying "I don't know how much we can rely on the benchmark in the article I posted". We clearly need more data. But I don't think that he would step as low (as some Rambus supporting hardware sites routinely do) as to cripple the RDRAM system with say PC-700 or PC-600. His results have already contradicted those of GameSpot which showed that an 820 system was very close in performance to Via's DDR chipset. I must have missed that. Did they test the prototype of Via chipset? Was it Piii or Athlon chipset? Do you have the link handy? I looked in www.gamespot.com but I didn't find it there. Joe

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (43113)	5/29/2000 9:50:00 AM
From: gnuman	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

Tenchusatsu, some maybe dumb questions. Are there reasons the DDR chip set "Colusa" couldn't be modified to work with Willamette? When a layman thinks of Willamette/Tehama and Foster/Colusa, you tend to get the impression of two radically different solutions. But is Foster to Willamette what Xeon is to PIII? Basically the same core with larger on chip cache? Is it possible that Colusa with modifications could also be used with Willamette to create a DDR solution? TIA