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: PAinvestor who wrote (42129)	1/10/1999 10:48:00 PM
From: MileHigh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 53903

PA, Based on the $500M investment, does the thread have any idea on how many RDRAM MU could produce? MileHigh

To: PAinvestor who wrote (42129)	1/11/1999 5:35:00 AM
From: Fred Fahmy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 53903

PAInvestor, <Intel is attempting to persuade the chip manufacturers to move volume production over to Direct-RDRAM> Re: my use of "soon" Of course this is a relative term and perhaps I should have been more specific. I think R-DRAM will be significant (unless INTC says otherwise) by the end of 2000. In hindsight, given this pace of this industry, the term "soon" was probably not well chosen. As for Intel attempting to persuade.... Many pundits thought that Intel was going to have a tough time persuading people to use socket 1 and PII (because of its added cost). This is an industry of standards and those in control generally set the standards. Intel's roadmap calls for the use of R-DRAM at the high end in their future products. What is high end in this industry "today", usually becomes mainstream "tomorrow". I'm not saying that R-DRAM is a given but it sure looks that way. My main point, however, is that I don't seem to hear much discussion of it here when trying to assess the future prospects of the memory industry. Good luck to all, FF