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: NightOwl who wrote (51650)	8/29/2000 3:31:42 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Hi NightOwl; Re: "can you suggest a reason for the absence of any effort by RMBS to have DRDRAM's core redesigned so as to take advantage of the performance enhancements of say: FCRAM, 1T-SRAM, CDRAM, or VC-DRAM?*" Sure. They're stupid, combined with a bit of NIH syndrome. Rambus never had the technical expertise required to specify DRAMs. It was (and remains) an ivory tower, theoretical, head in the clouds, intellectual, bumbling, forgetful scientist kind of operation rather than a practical DRAM engineering firm like Mosys (or Ramtron). Probably the best evidence for this is the fact that Intel and Rambus are currently thinking about reducing the number of banks from 32 to 4. This was an original mistake by Rambus which doomed their parts to having a 15% larger die size. That in itself prevented the technology from easily becoming the mainstream memory (which must be the cheapest), though the mistakes in the RSL area were also hard on the technology. Without Intel pushing it, RDRAM is obviously quite dead, and the fix to reduce the die penalty is years too late. The fact is that the die penalty has been known since years ago, but Intel and Rambus are only now addressing it. And the only reason they are is that the spectre of DDR compatible machines with cheaper memory, but with better latency and bandwidth specs is forcing them to. I would speculate that the Intel effort is only half hearted. They know that the technology is dead in the market place, but don't want to suddenly find themselves having to pay royalties on their RDRAM controllers. A PR is a cheap price for Intel to pay. Meanwhile Rambus continues on in its dreamlike waltz into the future. -- Carl

To: NightOwl who wrote (51650)	8/29/2000 5:55:45 PM
From: blake_paterson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Hooter, re: "Completely ignoring RMTR for the present, as well as the hatred of the major Fabs for anything having to do with RMBS, can you suggest a reason for the absence of any effort by RMBS to have DRDRAM's core redesigned so as to take advantage of the performance enhancements of say: FCRAM, 1T-SRAM, CDRAM, or VC-*DRAM?" Ah, there you go again, steering attention the direction of your beloved Ramtron. Why don't you go do that on the Ramtron board? BP