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 (54104)	9/19/2000 6:55:54 PM
From: Mohamed Saba	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

John, are you sure its 144 chips, i get 64 chips. Mohamed

To: Jdaasoc who wrote (54104)	9/19/2000 11:29:07 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

Re: They must be using repeaters. 4 GB divided by 288 MB RDRAM devices is 144 RDRAM chips You have to remember to treat the channels as 18 bits wide to take into account the ECC bits needed to correct for the inevitable RDRAM data corruption. :-) Also, note the use of the term "when" 288 bit devices are available - so the max right now is 2 gigabytes, and that's only if you use a repeater (as you pointed out) which increases latency. So the performance is even worse. We've had a workstation running at work for using an Abit motherboard, an Athlon 850, and 2 meg of unbuffered, unregistered SDRAM (unbuffered has lower latency than buffered). It would blow away anything that Dell machine could do on memory intensive applications (and what other kind do you run on a 2 gig machine?), since it isn't crippled with high latency RDAM further slowed by a repeater. It also cost about one half what the Dell machine does. Not money for nothing (as in no difference), but money for worse (performance). Of course, that Abit system, though better than the Dell system, will be totally outclassed by the various DDR systems being released over the next 30 to 90 days. Regards, Dan