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: K. M. Strickler who wrote (47952)	2/16/1998 7:57:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Ken - Re: " If some of the chips were moved to the 'daughterboard' (SIO/PIO disk controllers) then we could choose an EIDE (w/current SIO/PIO and controllers) card or a SCSI card containing the same functions. (Both cards would allow everything!)" I don't know what kind of motherboard/PC you have, but everyone I have bought for at least 4 years (3 PC's/motherboards) have the SIO, floppy and hard disk controllers soldered to the motherboard. As for SCSI - I use plug in cards for that - as do most people who use SCSI - simply because most people DON'T use SCSI and motherboard makers try to keep their costs down, including "universal" features. Re: "How many 'daughterboard' slots could be populated on the 'motherboard' if the 'motherboard' only contained the CPU, support, and memory slots." I don't know - is it important? Paul

To: K. M. Strickler who wrote (47952)	2/17/1998 4:23:00 PM
From: Jeff Fox	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

K.M. re: OT - daughtercards Actually your suggestions have merit and have and will be seriously considered. In fact original small systems were configured just this way. The "motherboard" was a passive backplane board. The CPU was on a card that plugged into the backplane. The IO controllers were on another card and memory on yet another. The Intel "Multibus" was one example of such a system. Problems developed. The most serious were electrical problems over the connectors. With so many connectors and the resulting long signal paths noise and reflections are serious problems. The cures were lots of resistors which contributed cost and consumed lots of power. It is a hard fact that components on a board separated by mere inches are much cleaner and thus faster and lower power. Secondly was reliability. Soldered components can be tested as one and assured to be of quality in the factory. The backplane systems were notoriously unreliable due to signal quality issues. Finally is cost, by far the most important issue. It has become a fact that components are often cheaper than connectors! Each system connector adds significant cost and really offers little to zero system value. Now that all the "super IO" functions fit in one part these functions are now much cheaper than backplane connectors. The PC industry can offer these functions on a motherboard for nearly free. This wouldn't be true if they are segmented off to daughter cards. Take a serial port card for instance. You'll find in the stores that these cards are the same price as multi function IO cards. It cost no more to provide a bundle than to provide only one function. Then if you check the cost structure for these cards you will find that the marketing cost greatly exceeds the component cost. Same is true for motherboard manufactures. The big cost is in modularity after stuff becomes a commodity. Jeff