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: Scumbria who wrote (66223)	2/19/2001 12:14:27 PM
From: froland	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Scumbria:That is the stretch of logic Rambus wants people to believe. I find it absurd. Believe what you wish. Intel looked at the cost savings related to pincount, and ignored the other costs of RDRAM: i.e. high test costs, higher manufacturing costs, etc. It was a terribly dumb decision on Intel's part. I don't think INTC ignored the higher RDRAM test and manufacturing costs. Rather, I think INTC expected that by the time Timna was to come along, RMBS yields would be up and prices would be down as a result of demand created by the i820/i850 ramp. The delay in the i820/i850 and the refusal of MU and IFX to work in good faith with INTC and ramp their RDRAM production is in my opinion as an INTC outsider the reasons leading to INTC's decision to scrap Timna. Thanks for the laugh. Enjoy it. What's more important is who gets the last one. froland.

To: Scumbria who wrote (66223)	2/19/2001 1:56:50 PM
From: Jdaasoc	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Scumbria: Timna was scrapped due to cost issues. Correct. Yes cost of memory was one issue but another more important is was end user preference for high level of graphics performance for computer games. Since the processor, chipset and graphics controller were intregrated together to produce an economy computing device, Intel did not have the ablility to design a graphics subsystem in Timna comparable to gaming devices with multiple semicondutor chips that were going to be available in 2001 at the same cost, Sony PS/2 or Microsoft XBOX, was the most critical reason why Timna was killed. The market for Timna didn't exist. The 815e chipset is striking proof that Intel now repsonds to the marketplace and does not tell them what it going to get to a large degree. Timna always was a lower price performance solution compared to Celeron at Intel just as Celeron is a lower price performance solution compared to Pentium III. Intel realized that AMD, Sony, Microsoft and Via have raised the bar so high so quickly in the last year that ditated the rapid increase in Pentium III CPU speed and even more rapid P4 rollout. In addition, the computer end user desire for ever faster and more realistic graphics is one reason that Intel has killed the very sucessful 815e chipset and come out with the same chipset, 815ep, minus the basic business graphics controller. This recent move with the 815ep indicates that people are willing to spend a little more money for fancier graphics which confirms my assumption that Timna died because the market for it just doesn't exist. john