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 (43790)	6/8/2000 6:02:00 PM
From: gnuman	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

Bus trade-offs Thinking about the differences between a RIMM and DIMM physical bus, IMO the key differences are: A RIMM bus is narrow, physically long and requires a high speed clock for data bandwidth. A DIMM bus is wide, physically short and requires a lower speed clock for data bandwidth. RIMM's The bus is highly engineered. Because the paths are relatively long, (they wind through the RIMM's), and at very high frequency's, they are designed to use strip or micro strip line to achieve transmission line characteristics. The line lengths must be tightly controlled to equal physical length to minimize "jitter", including compensation for "bends" in the lines. And to achieve transmission line characteristics, every active signal requires adjacent Via's to the ground plane to provide a path for the image current. (The image current is analogous to a two wire transmission line where the second wire is the image in the ground plane). The propagation delays are matched against control signals through innovative designs. Even so, the data "eye" is relatively narrow due to the high frequencies. (800 MHz on PC800). But with proper controls in the manufacture of the PCB's this is acceptable. IMO, this system will always be more expensive. DIMM's The data bus is four times as wide and consequently equivalent data bandwidth is achieved at much lower clock rates. Unlike RIMM's where the bus winds through the RIMM's, a DIMM bus merely extends to the adjacent connector. In the case of DDR266, the clock frequency is 1/3 of a PC800, and consequently the data "eye" is much wider. Since the bus doesn't appear to be designed as stringently as a RIMM, I suspect the system will be noisier. The wider data "eye" compensates for this. I suspect these systems will be cost competitive with existing PC133 designs. Both systems have their advantages, and I suspect the memory chip makers and the market will be the final decision maker in their relative success. These are just my opinions, feel free to take shots.

To: Bilow who wrote (43790)	6/8/2000 8:14:00 PM
From: blake_paterson	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 93625

<<VIA, like Rambus, is fabless, so the direction of their current research makes them a pretty good DDR play.>> GOOD MORNING TAIWAN!! Via = Research? Develops technology? ROTFLMAO! Now you've said it all pal. When are you coming back to the good old USA, where technology is developed, not copied? LOL, LOL!! BP

To: Bilow who wrote (43790)	6/8/2000 10:03:00 PM
From: blake_paterson	Respond to of 93625

<<VIA, like Rambus, is fabless, so the direction of their current research makes them a pretty good DDR play.>> A bastion of R&D, VIA is. Step right up and invest your $$ in this puppy: Intel seeks to ban import of Via chipsets By Michael Kanellos Staff Writer, CNET News.com January 20, 2000, 5:05 a.m. PT URL: news.cnet.com Intel has filed yet another complaint against chipmaker Via Technologies, this time asking a government agency to bar the Taiwanese company from importing products into the United States. The giant chipmaker has filed a complaint with the U.S. International Trade Commission to bar Via from importing, among other products, its Apollo Pro chipsets, which work with Intel's Celeron and Pentium III processors, said Chuck Mulloy, an Intel spokesman....Intel has filed a number of lawsuits against Via that center around a licensing deal that turned ugly. Via could not be reached for comment, but in the past the company has said they strongly dispute the allegations....In late 1998, Intel signed a deal to license its "P6" bus to Via. The bus is the main conduit for data between the microprocessor and the rest of the computer. Via planned to make chipsets incorporating the bus that would compete with Intel chipsets. And for your investment, you have access to cutting edge technology! Low end copy cats rated by Bert, no less: inqst.com Value PC Platforms - VIA vs. Intel A Performance Comparison of SMA Platforms. VIA ProSavage PM133 vs Intel 810e. <O:P</O:P Bert McComas, InQuest Market Research - June 2000 mccomas@inqst.com 480-813-7785<O:P</O:P Introduction Last year, Intel?s 810 and 810e chip sets established momentum for SMA (Shared Memory Architecture) in extremely low end PCs. This year the tide will begin to turn in the mainstream favoring higher performance and more flexible SMA platforms. These high volume mainstream platforms will require improved baseline graphics performance, PC133 support, AGP4x expansion, larger DRAM capacities, ATA66, AC97 and other I/O features. With these requirements met, a single low cost Value PC platform can be used across the entire performance spectrum from low-end to high-end in the uni-processor desktop PC space. Of course, high end users will likely prefer an AGP upgrade, but if its 2D performance is adequate, an integrated graphics controller may satisfy large portions of the market. From PC maker?s perspective, there is great advantage in the opportunity to upgrade or ?upsell? a competitive yet inexpensive base platform. A mainstream SMA platform will offer a low entry price with plenty of ?build to order? or retail upgrade headroom. VIA?s ProSavage PM133 is the first chip set on the market to respond to these requirements. Essentially, the PM133 north bridge is VIA?s 694 north bridge chip integrated with an S3 Savage4 graphics controller. Intel?s offering this year will include the 810/810e plus the new 815 chip set. Essentially, the 815 is an 810e with PC133 support plus an external AGP bus. Though these two features are vital for any mainstream platform, the 815 will probably be hampered by the 810?s slightly under-performing integrated accelerator. VIA?s challenge will be to offer 815 or better performance while maintaining their reputation for lower cost.