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: Bilow who wrote (82225)	5/3/2002 5:25:49 AM
From: NightOwl	Respond to of 93625

-- Carl P.S. The above post may give some people a clue about what digital design with DRAM is like. I am shocked at the wanton disregard for Mom & Pop "densities" evidenced by this statement Mr. Bilow! <g> Why I could show you accredited EE's without said "clue," let alone the sainted masses of my Mom & Pop bretheren and sisteren! <Hoo Hoo> You look for compatibility relationships and try to support as much as possible with the least effort. Intel doesn't look like they're trying so hard anymore. Ahhhhhhhhh! But herein lies the Irony of Ironies. Life in the Niches has come home to Los Altos. Remember back in the good old days? When INTC, Gorilla Extraordinaire, launched this dog & pony show with those immortal words: "Hey stupid! What do I have to do? Draw you a MAP?!! You'll make it, and you'll like it, because I say so!!" <sigh> Why the crowing around here was deafening. And you,... then a mere Unknown Commodity EE, being Bashed about the premises by the Illuminati of Mom & Popdom [a/k/a The Alumbrados of Andy; see also, The Perfectibilists of INTC] for having the temerity to interpose a technical question. ...My how times have changed. Where once the Gorilla peddled its clearly defective RDRAM designs, it now runs from the "shockingly" improved performance of DRDRAM IV. Having been traumatized by the "snare" which took its left index finger, it now seeks salvation through the ordinance of the sacred Standardized Offering. And where once Mom & Pop cried: "Performance be DAMNED! If INTC be for us, WHO can stand against us!" They now complain: Its a conspiracy I tell you! How can they NOT make this Performance IP the industry standard!!?? A "clue?" ...Come on. After all this time, do you really think Mom & Pop have the capacity to grasp any of this? You sir, are an optimist. <Hoo Hoo> 0\|0

To: Bilow who wrote (82225)	5/3/2002 8:59:15 AM
From: h0db	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Carl-- the i845E won't support PC2700 either theinquirer.net "...while the 845E supports the 533MHz front side bus for Northwood B Pentium 4s, the new memory controller hub (MCH) on 845E does not support PC2700 DDR." Seems to be a pattern with Intel. They must want to keep AMD in the game so the DoJ leaves them alone. If only they had engineers as competent as you.

To: Bilow who wrote (82225)	9/7/2002 3:13:06 AM
From: Bilow	Respond to of 93625

Hi all; Elixe on Rambus notices that Rambus had to tighten the PC1066-32 RDRAM spec to meet Intel's requirements: tCAC Units 1066-32 9 tCYCLE 1066-32P 8 tCYCLE(Note) Note: Used only for device bins that support tCAC = 8. boards.fool.com This is a little different from the note that I posted on May 3, 2002 (see #reply-17417067 ), which did not include the 1066-32P figures. What I called the 1066-32, is now called the 1066-32P, and the 1066-32 is slightly longer in tCAC. The new spec matrix is: 1066 1066 1066 1066 800 800 600 Parameter -30 -32P -32 -35 -40 -45 -53 Max Units --------- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----- ------ tRC 28 28 28 32 28 28 28 -- tCYCLE tRAS 20 20 20 22 20 20 20 64uS tCYCLE tRP 8 8 8 10 8 8 8 -- tCYCLE tRCD 7 9 9 9 7 9 7 -- tCYCLE tCAC 8 8 9 9 8 8 8 12 tCYCLE tRDP 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 -- tCYCLE tRTP 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 -- tCYCLE rambus.com The differences are that the new 1066-32 has tCAC loosened to 9 instead of 8 tCYCLEs, the 1066-32P is new, and the 1066-35's tRDP and tRTP have been tightened. Rambus killed the link to the spec sheet where I got the May numbers, so it's apparent that their earlier spec sheet had to go bye bye. That may account for the extra delay in Intel's getting PC1066 validation. The point of all this was that the 1066-32 column and the 800-45 columns were identical, so Intel could get 533MHz PC bus and PC1066-32 compatibility from the i850 chip without having to spin the silicon. With Rambus' alteration of the 1066-32 figures, and the creation of the new spec for 1066-32P, the above shows that Intel still didn't have to spin the 850 in order to get the 850E. But it's obvious now from the IDF that Intel is walking away from Rambus. -- Carl