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 (75147)	6/29/2001 10:04:49 AM
From: gnuman	Respond to of 93625

ST re: It seems to me that the bull argument comes down to RDRAM being a better value i.e. better delta-price/delta-performance. If I recall correctly, there was an unofficial P4 test of DDR vs RDRAM performance and RDRAM did not do very well. Does anyone still remember that or care to comment? In most cases, benchmarks have been taken over by the marketing departments. IMO, the billion or so dollars spent promoting WindowsXP and P4 will include new benchmarks showing P4/RDRAM as the best and fastest solution for XP in a number of new applications that XP supports. In the consumer market this may have significant impact on purchasing decisions. (You know what they say about perception and reality). The business market is another animal, but I'm sure Intel has something up their sleeve. <g> Marketing owns the problem now, and management is providing major resources to meet the objectives. Watch the major trade magazines respond to the ad placement dollars. <G> JMO's

To: Sun Tzu who wrote (75147)	6/29/2001 1:13:20 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Respond to of 93625

sun, i thought the rmbs argument was that intel was god and gets whatever they want and that ddr was already dead. ho ho ho ho ho! ;-)

To: Sun Tzu who wrote (75147)	6/29/2001 5:38:54 PM
From: Bilow	Respond to of 93625

Hi Sun Tzu; Re: "An alternate case can be devised due to lack of DDR chipset release for P4. Take an Athelon and a P4 system that benchmark similarly with PC133. Then look at the performance differences of the same systems when using DDR and RDRAM respectively. This should provide an idea as to how much system improvement one can expect from each memory. Anand or some other HW site should already have these benchmarks." The reason you can't compare the performance increase for DDR over SDRAM in an Athlon to that of RDRAM over SDRAM in a P4 is that you are comparing apples to oranges. As an example of this sort of comparison, why not compare the advantage that DDR has over SDRAM in an Athlon to that of RDRAM over SDRAM in a PIII? Since it is already fairly well known that the PIII performs worse with RDRAM than it does with low latency PC133, you undoubtedly would scream "unfair". The only "fair" test will be DDR on the P4 versus RDRAM on the P4. And even then, I bet you'll get different results for each and every combination of benchmark and chipset (i.e. VIA, SiS, Serverworks, ALi, 850B) that you try. In other words, it's highly likely that no one is going to make any knockout punches with performance comparisons. What will happen instead, is that the cheapest memory will win in the end, just as it always has. (Do note that SDRAM didn't win over DRAM until it became equal in price. But RDRAM will always be more expensive than SDRAM.) -- Carl