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 : Micron Only Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DavidG who wrote (28048)	2/9/1998 12:11:00 AM
From: Jeff Leader	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 53903

I just threw that in to make a point. And my point is that -12 SDRAM will never be used in volume in 100MHz systems. Despite what the home hobbyist might attempt. In fact, OEMs will be very careful about choosing -10 SDRAM for 100MHz systems. Overclocking Intel chips has nothing to do reputable manufacturer's, it has to do with understanding Intel products and their very high yields. They actually make chips so well now that they are actually all at the high end of the performance scale. They just stamp them with different frequencies. Again, my point is that what the reputable OEMs (IBM, CPQ, etc) do is to abide by the marked specs on the chip. They have to make millions of systems work reliably in various environmental conditions. As for 'yield' - parts are tested and are 'binned' into the highest frequency they pass. Intel's tests (and test environment) is probably more rigorous than the average PC encounters. Occasionally, parts must be 'down-binned' or marked slower than they are, to meet demand for lower-speed parts. However, manufacturers understandably hesitate to do this as it costs them money. Third, 60ns and 70ns memory is installed in PC's with 66MHZ bus rates. Did you calculate the megahertz for the chips? If you understood anything about how EDO and FPM memory is accessed in a PC, you'd realize this is a ridiculous question.