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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dan3 who wrote (144882)	10/8/2001 3:09:21 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Dan and others, performance of P4 DDR chipset from SiS: anandtech.com DDR-333 beats RDRAM-800 in most benchmarks, and even DDR-266 comes close. The neat thing about this chipset is that the processor bus can still run at 400 MHz (100 MHz quad-pumped) while the memory bus can run at 266 or 333 MHz (133 or 166 MHz double-pumped). Not sure about system stability with DDR-333, but these benchmarks are a sign of things to come. Tenchusatsu

To: Dan3 who wrote (144882)	10/8/2001 3:42:10 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Dan, Re: "After AMD developed and marketed DDR as a PC platform, Intel is copying the techniques." AMD did not invent DDR, nor did they even do a majority of the development. JEDEC developed the technology. As a member of JEDEC, AMD may have participated, but they weren't the leading developer. Furthermore, their participation in the marketing of DDR was practically non-existent, so I can hardly see your point in that respect, either. Now, Intel is using JEDEC's technology, and they have added their portions to the specs. It has nothing to do with copying AMD. "But I guess nobody needs DDR until Intel starts shipping chipsets that support it. " I'd say the Pentium 4 needs DDR memory (over standard SDRAM) much more than the Athlon needs it. But I assume your point was that DDR has been an important technology for the industry, and without AMD backing DDR, Rambus may have been chosen as the leading technology, instead. While that may be a valid argument, I don't see either technology as having vast superiority over the other. The only difference is that DDR won the industry popularity contest, but not necessarily because it was the better technology. wanna_bmw