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: Elmer who wrote (82500)	6/2/1999 1:24:00 PM
From: Tom Warren	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Regardless of individual technical merits, I think the biggest difference from Intels viewpoint is that Rambus goes all the way in one step to full performance. The alternative scenario is three steps; pc133, ddr, ddrII. The three step scenario will segment the market for dram, the Rambus approach (if completely adopted) will not.

To: Elmer who wrote (82500)	6/2/1999 1:39:00 PM
From: Tom Warren	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

You can turn the pincount argument around the other way. For the same pincount implement multiple rambus channels and achieve bandwidth the alternatives can't. I believe Tenchuhatsu's comment pertains to Rambus ability to process multiple requests concurrently, so long as they refer to a separate bank. Effectively overlapping latency on each request. A 32 chip RIMM has 512 banks if I did the math correctly. A multi-processor system would take maximum advantage of this concurrency.