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: tinkershaw who wrote (75225)	7/1/2001 3:41:07 PM
From: NightOwl	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Dear Mr. Shaw: I think Bilow has made enough of a fool of him or herself to pretty much be discredited as any objective observer on this thread, the personal attacks alone should have been sufficient to accomplish this, which is a shame, because Bilow is really a much more talented writer and advocate than this. If Bilow wants to be a pro-DDR, anti-Rambus poster (and I say "want to" because that is all Bilow wants to be, not someone discussing the industry, the markets, et. al.) that is fine. Do it honestly. If DDR is so good and the wave of the future and RDRAM so bad and on its way out wouldn't the simple objective presentation of all the facts be sufficient to prove this? I am beginning to think that you know as much about honesty and dishonesty as you do about civil fraud and criminal fraud.<vbg> Can it truly be that you are blind to Mr. Bilow's purposes and motivations? The great majority of Bilow's posts are simply citations to or reprints from URL's which he finds to give support to his POV. A POV shared, albeit belatedly, by Fortune, Forbes, and a Virginia jury of YOUR peers. Reject these if you must. It will no doubt be joyfully accepted as just compensation for the effort by Mr. Billow. As even my high school freshman can see (and Bilow himself has openly stated) his sole motivation for twisting this "knife" long after its initial 1999 insertion is simply the pleasure derived from doing unto others that which was done unto him back in those halcyon days of heady share prices and "Poppa INTC can do no wrong."<Ho Hoo 8-> The lesson I have learned from this little vignette is that one should be extra nice to ones critics on the way up, because you will meet them again on the way down - and some of them will be quite knowledgeable of your soft under belly and quite capable of applying an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, and personal invective to the nether regions of YOUR POV. But you can continue to sling the arrows of "moral" outrage at this "World Turned Upside Down." Challenge the reason, integrity and honesty of your opponent while employing his self same tactics, albeit with supporting citations to neither Forbes, Fortune, nor Virginia Judge nor jury. Continue to whine and wail for the "Good Old Days" here; when the Long POV held the high share value ground and 80% of the "INTC told me so" industry news links were so easily twisted to support YOUR point of view. But I suggest that it will get you nothing but more of that which you seek to avoid. Yes, one would think that a simple presentation of the "facts" would be sufficient. Unfortunately INTC and RMBS wouldn't accept the facts that were and tried to buy a new set of facts at the expense of Mom & Pop consumer, as usual. Unfortunately, they misjudged the adequacy of their price and came up short. Now they can either reach down and ante up much, much more, or they can cave and accept the alternate reality. But their "facts will never be consistent with the "Unified Field Theory" of Memory unless its over MU's dead body. ...And MU is not Hynix.<vbg> Bilow is motivated by the refusal of Tate, and his fellow Busers, to accept Team DDR's "facts" and like most competitive beings, his intent is galvanized by attacks on his person. You will not be able to "smart" bomb him into submission. You will have to send in the ground forces to root him out and from what I have seen you don't have the public resources for that job. <g> If you won't take my advice, take your own. Give this Bilow a wide berth.<vbg> 0\|0

To: tinkershaw who wrote (75225)	7/1/2001 10:40:02 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Re: There is nothing of objective truth in the vast majority of the posts I am receiving Look here: samsungelectronics.com Then look here: samsungelectronics.com Note the time it takes to get a byte of information out of Rambus RDRAM 800: 45 or 53.3 nanoseconds (there are two speeds available) Now look at the time it takes to get a byte of information out of DDR 266: It comes in two speeds, 7.5 nanoseconds and 10 nanoseconds. There is a 2 cycle delay (CL2) or a 2.5 cycle delay (CL2.5) your choice, depending on the part you order. The slowest DDR266 is 2.5 times 7.5 + 7.5 nanoseconds to read or 26.25 nanoseconds to deliver data in response to a read request. The fastest RDRAM is 45 nanoseconds - it takes significantly longer to perform a short read from the fastest RDRAM 800 than it does from the slowest DDR 266. RDRAM is slower because it's slower. I don't know what simpler language to use for you. RDRAM 800 has a 1.6GB/sec data rate while DDR 2100 has a 2.1GB/sec data rate. Because it's slower, RDRAM is never used with fewer than 2 channels, whereas DDR is almost always used as only a single channel. The cost of implementing an RDRAM channel is as high or higher than the cost of implementing a DDR channel because the RDRAM specification is a very tight one and the extra pins needed by DDR are very cheap (the low cost of pins is the result of technology developed after RDRAM was conceived - and surprised just about everybody, most of all Intel). Rambus wasn't intended to be fast, it was intended to be cheap, which was to allow more channels to be used, which was expected to inexpensively provide something almost as good as fast memory. Read the datasheets. READ THE DATASHEETS! The memory in rambus is slow, the per pin speed is high, the bandwidth per channel is a little slower than DDR but almost all RDRAM motherboards use double the number of channels to make up for RDRAM being so slow, and the result is high bandwidth through the use of dual channels - not the use of fast memory. Available dual channel Rambus motherboards have a higher data throughput than available single channel DDR motherboards. Which is why they are generally more expensive (though with sales having been below plan quarter after quarter, surplus boards can often be found cheap). Rambus is slower. It's slower. Deal with it.