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: Jdaasoc who wrote (51077)	8/24/2000 6:40:22 PM
From: Ali Chen	Respond to of 93625

Jdaasoc, <You don't need 3rd RIMM if the maximum number of RDRAM devices - 32 - can be placed on 2 RIMMS as Samsung recently claims with 288MB RDRAM.> Number of devices does not depend on bit capacity of chips. The number of chips per RIMM is determined by the size of chip packages, and it was always possible to put 16 chips on a RIMM. More, didn't you guys were overly exited in the past about flexible "granularity" of the Rambus? What has happened to this exciting (but useless) feature? :) :) If you say I "don't need 3rd RIMM", why this design was pushed by Rambus/Intel in first place? Why it is so hard to admit that the 3-RIMM design had very marginal signal integrity, and was eliminated solely due to this reason? Which hints that the signal integrity of 2-RIMM design also remains near marginal and has no room to grow. And therefore no way to serious RAS designs. It's so simple:) - Ali