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.

Strategies & Market Trends : LastShadow's Position Trading -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Judy who wrote (9306)	2/26/1999 6:13:00 PM
From: AlienTech	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 43080

>>Irrational selling would be a good sign and a good thing to wait for. << YEA! Cant wait for the sox to drop another 50 points on monday. But talk about irrational buying in a bad market. RDA 2.813 34.000 32.000 34.750 31.2 1,833,700 2,669,463,000 Reader's Digest Association, Inc. ABS 2.875 57.000 54.813 57.125 24.2 826,200 13,292,721,000 Albertson's, Inc. IMNX 3.000 141.500 139.000 145.250 n/a 358,400 5,540,970,000 Immunex Corporation AMZN 3.125 128.125 121.000 130.000 n/a 12,682,700 19,805,875,000 Amazon.com, Inc. BVSN 3.688 44.875 40.313 45.000 257.4 719,500 1,011,812,000 BroadVision, Inc. XCIT 3.688 102.500 97.500 103.250 n/a 1,465,200 5,318,978,000 Excite, Inc. PER 4.125 43.313 39.500 43.438 n/a 1,062,400 3,314,048,000 Perot Systems Corporation CMGI 4.250 122.625 115.125 124.750 103.8 2,331,900 5,462,533,000 CMGI, Inc. NSOL 4.438 181.500 171.000 190.375 264.3 1,276,100 2,849,467,000 Network Solutions, Inc. VLSI 4.750 15.500 15.000 16.375 24.4 15,879,900 491,297,000 VLSI Technology, Inc. VIGN 7.500 54.250 45.000 54.625 n/a 663,200 Vignette Corporation BKX 7.850 822.910 809.550 827.880 n/a PHLX Bank Sector Index INTU 9.375 98.938 90.500 100.000 n/a 1,932,700 5,357,271,000 Intuit Inc. Dont care about EBAY! Market crashes due to upgrades. Applied Materials Inc. (AMAT) 57 1/8 -6 5/8: Gerard Klauer Mattison upgrades semiconductor equipment maker from a "hold" to "buy" with a 12-month price target of $85.....

To: Judy who wrote (9306)	2/28/1999 7:27:00 PM
From: AlienTech	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 43080

Is Rambus Faster than SDRAM? In this Rambus analysis I will repeat the same application modeling technique that I applied to SDRAM and ESDRAM in a previous article. Because Rambus is seen as a high-end technology, I have chosen to raise the CPU speeds up a few notches. This time the range is between 350 and 667MHz. As before 2D (biz apps), multimedia and 3D loads are evaluated in standard architecture platforms and in UMA platforms. A quick look at the average performance impact by CPU type below indicates that Rambus decreases benchmarkable performance by about 1% in standard architecture systems compared to SDRAM. However, the low-end UMA platform benefits from a 1-3% performance boost as compared to SDRAM. This would be somewhat encouraging, except that Intel is not expected to use Rambus in its UMA systems anytime soon. If Intel can convince you that Rambus is better, they will want to use it as a hook to sell more high-end systems, not more low-end systems. In these high-end systems, users pay hundreds of dollars for performance improvements of just a few percent. The unfortunate reality appears to be that Rambus will take some of that away, while probably driving the system cost up even higher. This is a strange thing for a CPU vendor to do. Why would Intel deliberately promote a memory type that reduces CPU efficiency? I can't answer that, but I must point out that the same question applies to the 740. Why would Intel promote a graphics chip architecture that needlessly sacrifices CPU performance? In the case of the 740, Intel potentially degrades CPU performance by 10% in order to save a few dollars in graphics DRAM. Then, in the case of Rambus, Intel reverses its position and asks us to pay a premium for DRAM, while still suffering a reduction in performance. The whole thing seems terribly screwed up. tomshardware.com Isn't Rambus going to be really fast? Remember, there are two kinds of fast – low latency and high bandwidth. Rambus offers extremely high bandwidth, but has slower latency than even standard SDRAM. Its slower latency will compromise CPU performance, but its higher bandwidth exceeds the ability of the CPU to use. This does not translate to "fast". Doesn't Rambus run at 800MHz? It is described as 800MHz DRAM, but the bus actually runs at a 400MHz clock with a double data rate approach like AGP and DDR SDRAM. In order to hit this clock speed, the bus width had to be reduced by 75%. At 16 bits wide, it is not wide enough to issue commands to the DRAM in the standard manner. It must packetize and serialize the commands and data between the controller and the DRAM chip. This adds delays in the path between the chip set and DRAM, resulting in slower access latency. What is "Fake Rambus"? Because of the uncertainty of Rambus, Intel is developing a version of the Rambus Memory Module that doesn't use Rambus DRAM at all. It uses SDRAM. This type of module may be cheaper and easier to get than "Real Rambus", but its performance will be even worse than Rambus. Each module will have an additional translator chip that increases latency further, making fake Rambus probably the slowest high speed memory on Earth. Intel may even use "Fake Rambus" to demonstrate how Rambus is faster than SDRAM. Don't fall for it. tomshardware.com