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: Sun Tzu who wrote (73151)	5/17/2001 4:10:49 PM
From: Jdaasoc	Respond to of 93625

ST: So here is my limited understanding of the issues and everyone is welcome to poke holes at it or add to it. If you really think that RMBS is going to be in high end servers, it would be bucking everything carl and scumbria have been posting about for years. They are the experts at negative comments and retoric. I choose to not try either to poke holes in or built up unrealistically future events I have no ability to forsee. john

To: Sun Tzu who wrote (73151)	5/17/2001 7:24:52 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

Hi Sun Tzu; Re your understanding of RDRAM... Since you're not in the industry, you have to understand that a lot of your understanding has been provided by information from parties that are either incompetent or not disinterested. But it's good that you made a list. Here's my take on the points: (1) Yep. AFAIK Rambus has protection for RDRAM. (2) DDR scales considerably better than RDRAM. The issue is complex, and can not be approached with out specifying what kind of scaling. Memory systems have four characteristics, MBytes, peak bandwidth, latency, and block transfer size. But over the region that would include servers, DDR is preferable. (3) Wrong. DDR chips are available that have better bandwidth than any available RDRAM chip. DDR DIMMs are available that have higher bandwidth than any available RDRAM RIMM. (4) Right. Generally, DDR has less latency. (5) Right. DDR is cheaper. (6) 50/50. The memory makers do hate Rambus, but that doesn't mean that they will turn down a profit. What the memory makers want to do with RDRAM is force it into a niche product. In order to do this, the best weapon that they've come up with is to break the RDRAM market (not the RIMM market, mind you), into too many segments so as to avoid a commodity situation. To do this, several of the memory makers came up with different pinouts for RDRAM chips, and these are incompatible. (There are 5 such pinouts available now, though I've posted a list of only 4 of them.) Consequently, after you write a contract to buy RDRAM chips from Micron, for instance, there is no second source available. This allows Micron to charge higher prices. See #reply-15751210 for a list of the various pinouts that RDRAM has been splintered into. Samsung has a manufacturing with RDRAM over the other guys, while Micron has an advantage with SDRAM and DDR. One has to take what those two companies say with a bit of a grain of salt. (7) I think so. (8-9) Outside my area of expertise. (10) I think that Rambus already has lost the 2/3 of their revenue accounted for by SDRAM and DDR. Wall street agrees that those royalties were 3/4 the long term value of the company. There are also design issues. See #reply-15751210 (same as above) for a description of why the industry, (now that Intel has given up on forcing RDRAM down the memory makers throats), isn't designing very many new RDRAM based designs. -- Carl