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: jim kelley who wrote (43340)	6/3/2000 3:54:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 93625

Jim, <It seems likely that the 820E has dual channel RDRAM capability> I don't think so. Instead, I think all four RIMM slots will reside on the same RDRAM channel. This was the original intention, although the initial 820 implementation couldn't support more than three, then two due to electrical problems. The new 820E should have a new stepping of the north bridge, solving the two-RIMM limitation (and perhaps even the three-RIMM limitation). My hope is that the new 820E north bridge also improves performance somewhat. That should silence the critics a little, though the cost issue still remains. Tenchusatsu

To: jim kelley who wrote (43340)	6/4/2000 1:36:00 AM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

jim kelley, It seems likely that the 820E has dual channel RDRAM capability. It is extremely unlikely If so, this should raise its performance level significantly and put an end the endless benchmark controversy. Significantly? 840 is not significantly faster than 820. The current CPU bandwidth is between 800 MB/s and 1,064 MB/s. Single channel RDRAM can provide 1,600 MB/s, double of what some CPU's can accept. How much can you possibly gain by doubling it again, if memory bandwidth is not the bottleneck in the first place? Joe