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: pompsander who wrote (44194)	6/12/2000 4:43:00 PM
From: Scumbria	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Pomp, During all this debate Carl and others have explained over and over how one of DDR's great strengths was that it was a logical extension of SDRAM and did not require massive retooling, reengineering, etc. O.K., fine..great. If so, how long should it take to produce a working chipset? I think if it was as basic and "evolutionary rather than revolutionary" as stated, working prototypes ought to be out and around by now. I'm inclined to agree with you. The lack of DDR systems may indicate that something is wrong. I have no visibility into this, perhaps Carl can comment. Scumbria

To: pompsander who wrote (44194)	6/12/2000 4:48:00 PM
From: Jdaasoc	Respond to of 93625

pomp: 128 MB SDRAM pricing has just jumped from $115 to $128 while microprocessor have dropped a little and hard drive have dropped off the table. I think that if components for making up computer system are coming down and DRAM is going up: the rudiments of a RDRAM ramp up may be starting to happen just like one year ago with Camino rollout. A RDRAM ramp up will cut into supply of SDRAM heavily due to yield per die issues. Will SDRAM pricing rise die on the vine within 30 days or it for real. If I was betting what will sell well in volume for Christmas 2000 it will be PC133 soluiton not RDRAM. Christmas 1999 was supposily a RDRAM Christmas. john

To: pompsander who wrote (44194)	6/12/2000 4:58:00 PM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

pompsander, As a marketing guy, I would tell you that I need that product now, right now, yesterday! <g> But then, the guys like Tom, Anand, Sharky etc. will come out with benchmarks that disprove the point, as they did with Rambus. I suppose the need was perceived. We moved from the 100 Megahertz FSB to 133 and beyond. CPU speeds move up, up, up. Even at 133 MHz FSB, the CPU is only capable of accepting 1 GB of data per second - the same amount that PC-133 can provide, much less than single channel RDRAM. The additional bandwidth of RDRAM has no place to go. But there will be need for higher bandwidth as we move from Pentium III to Athlon and Willamette. Athlon CPU can accept all of the bandwidth of DDR or single channel RDRAM, Willamette is even higher. As the penetration of Athlon and Willamette grows, so will the need for higher bandwidth memory. Joe

To: pompsander who wrote (44194)	6/12/2000 11:47:00 PM
From: Ali Chen	Respond to of 93625

Popmsander, <how long should it take to produce a working chipset?> That is an interesting question. Do anyone remember how long it took to bring a working chipset for Socket7 platform? For Intel? Anyone remember that sequential debugging of 430FX, then 430HX, then 430VX, then 430TX? Now anyone about Slot-i? 440FX, LX, BX, ...? Now, how long Intel was developing the 820 chipset? (Maybe this is not the best reference point due to recent recall, so it is hard to say if it is working or not exactly yet) As a marketing guy, you probably keep all the press releases on file... I am just curious too :)