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: Joe NYC who wrote (43161)	5/30/2000 1:51:00 AM
From: Tenchusatsu	Respond to of 93625

Joe, <Are you now going to denounce the Stream benchmark?> I've never heard of the benchmark. It seems just as valid of a benchmark as the memory bandwidth benchmarks released by Intel and Rambus. Both are trying to anticipate what memory bandwidth requirements will look like in the near future. (Yet you say that the Stream benchmark was used to show off the performance of the 440BX platform? Wow, that is an old benchmark.) <I don't think 815 will match BX in performance. But it is not because can't be done. It is because Intel chose not to do so. ... You trade performance for flexibility.> You pretty much hit the nail right on the head. However, it's more than just asynchronous buses, FYI. <How much more Rambus friendly can a benchmark get?> Application-suite benchmarks count much more in my book than synthetic ones. Anyone can conjure up a synthetic benchmark and claim that their benchmark will reflect what real-world performance will look like in the future. Tenchusatsu

To: Joe NYC who wrote (43161)	5/30/2000 2:06:00 AM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Joe, more on Tom's latest "I hate Rambus" article, from the Yahoo! board: messages.yahoo.com Essentially, what Tom has done here is heavily eight the benchmark tests to highlight the known initial latency penalty. He uses this "initial latency" penalty to wipe out the bandwidth advantage that RDRAM has over SDRAM with normal programs. So what Tom has done is cynically repeal the laws of "program locality" and "data locality" which have guided the develop of computer memory architectures for the last 30 years. He has no shame and a firm belief in the ignorance of the masses. And a little on Van Smith, the author of that article (thanks for the link, Jim Kelley): messages.yahoo.com Some of Van's quotes on ZDNet's Talkback forums: [Gateway] has restored thier good name by..publicly (sic) renouncing Mafioso Intel Athlon good, Coppermine bad...the Coppermine is an arthritic, feeble, ancient design whose life Intel is struggling to extend with steriod injection after steroid injection. WARNING: DON'T FEED THE APES (Anonymous Posters Espousing Satan--Satan of course, being Intel)...In their dirty guerilla war against AMD, Intel has unleashed an army of APES and their media stooges, to shape public opinion. Be wary of any anonymous posts ranting Intel's company line! Yep, we can trust Van Smith to be an impartial journalist, all right! Tenchusatsu