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: gnuman who wrote (73334)	5/21/2001 1:46:56 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Hi Gene Parrott; I never said that their would only be one memory, I said that there can only be one "mainstream" memory. The graphics DDR chips, SGRAM and x32 SDRAM are not mainstream products. Like RDRAM, they are niche products and sell for a hefty premium. -- Carl

To: gnuman who wrote (73334)	5/22/2001 6:01:09 AM
From: NightOwl	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Owl: In Samsungs case it can alter DRDRAM supply to maintain its preferred price because it's target market (P4 systems) has no options. Gene P: I consider Intel's new chip-set for P4 SDRAM/DDR as an option. Think about the reasons for this change in the "roadmap." Owl II: I agree that future options will be options - in the future. And your referenced "future" option will have a substantial impact on Samsung's prices. But here and now, Samsung's DRDRAM prices are paid by a captive audience. Owl: Dell/INTC have to pay Samsung's price because they don't like competition and must also "die" by that sword.<g> Gene P: I think Intel and Samsung have corporate relationships and Agreements that go back over twenty years. I think Intel has invested well over a Billion dollars in Samsung during that period. Last March DELL announced a $16 billion Agreement with Samsung which among other things assures a supply of memory components. While we don't know the terms of those Agreements, I'm sure they include "MFC" prices which are well below what the rest of the industry pays. Owl II: No doubt all of these unclean hands are washing each other constantly; but surely you aren't suggesting that Samsung has agreed to sell DRDRAM to INTC/Dell at actual cost or less in order to avoid increasing the already excessive RMBS costs of to the other legs of the Axis? <Ho Ha 8-> Owl: But I suspect that you should consider this particular round of DRAM "Segmentation" as another in a long line of "Standards Wars." Gene P: PC segmentation broadly defines the price/performance of the systems and the application sector for which they're targeted. It ranges from the "Value" segment to high end work stations. The "Value" segment is satisfied by a Celeron or Duron processor with the cheapest PC100 memory. Segmentation also differentiates between desk top and mobile systems. The memory requirements of the various segments are vastly different. The other thing to consider is that the P4 is the first new micro-architecture from Intel in many years. To get full advantage of it's architectural features requires different memory than legacy CPU's. Even Carl's favorite product , PC graphics, uses different memory based on price/performance. There is "more than one." <G> Owl II: Hmmmm, and here I thought we were talking memory "segmentation."<vbg> No matter. It is certainly obvious that Samsung and every other memory Fab would love "segmentation" and the power to differentiate product in the market that comes with it. Their problem of course is trying to convince us buyers that SX-CPU's, PC-600, or PC-100 memory is worth a good spit when the realities of competition in a competitive commodity* market* put the prices of the top end Pentium, PC-800, PC2100 in the screaming buy column.<vbg> I will admit that certain companies are so enamored of this "segmetation" dream that they simply refuse to wake up and smell the chemical deposition sputter on those 12 inch wafer lines. ...And if they can get the Mom & Pops to suck up the Celeron/Duron, PC-600/i4 crap by slapping the "value" tag on them, I say more power to 'em. But its one thing to out flank the disorganized and unwary Mom & Pops; its another thing to enable FRAUD in an effort to obtain the long sought and completely unwarranted segmentation of the memory market. Perhaps putting up with a little FRAUD is OK in defense of segmentation and higher prices; but I will go to "roost" trusting in commodity pricing and competitive markets to save me from such moral quandaries. 0\|0 P.S. I thought about the reason for INTC's ever changing "roadmap." My conclusion is that INTC doesn't know where its going but was forced to admit, yet again, that isn't big enough to force me to make the trip with them. However, I trust that they will keep trying.<vbg>