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 : Rambus (RMBS) - Eagle or Penguin -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kapkan4u who wrote (21687)	6/4/1999 5:18:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 93625

And here's my response: Message 9965543 Tenchusatsu

To: kapkan4u who wrote (21687)	6/4/1999 5:22:00 PM
From: REH	Respond to of 93625

and who will Intel support? right answer: Rambus pretty powerful if you ask me! reh

To: kapkan4u who wrote (21687)	6/4/1999 5:26:00 PM
From: MulhollandDrive	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

From jc-news.com 9/06/04, 5:05pm - Okay, I admit it! That particular articlet I put up is a bit extremist, and does have some inaccuracies. I was mainly interested in seeing what kind of reaction it would get, but there are a couple things that I honestly didn't know about DRDRAM. Okay, apparently the clock of 800MHz DRDRAM is 400MHz (it's double pumped), so I was wrong to criticize zdnet on that account. I still think it's really promising, though that DDR is achieving bandwidth equivalent to 300MHz SDRAM right now, while Rambus is spec'd to possibly not be completely ready for 200MHz SDRAM-equivalence at the end of the year. Dang.... Okay, I promise I'll actually read into all this and reassess. I hate being considered as part of an "anti-Rambus coalition", especially considering my info isn't all correct. I do admit, too, that part of my motivation for being anti-Rambus is that I don't like the idea of one of the competitors in the cpu market (especially by far the most powerful one) having a controlling interest in the memory standards market. That's like Microsoft suddenly getting control over BIOSes -- it leaves too much to the imaginations in terms of scary possibilities, like Microsoft modifying their BIOSes to only accept certain copyrighted OS codes at bootup.... Ah, well. I'll try to be less extremist in the future. :) regards, bp

To: kapkan4u who wrote (21687)	6/4/1999 5:54:00 PM
From: MileHigh	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 93625

kap, Welcome! I have a question and it's a serious one, so I hope you answer; Why would Sony choose RDRAM over DDR for their upcoming PSII (or III or whatever they are going to call it) if; 1- DDR is so much better/faster? 2- Its cheaper? 3- No real foundry and equip would need to be deployed to produce such chip? 4- and will have plentiful supply? CEO of Sony actually called DDR "unstable"- his words in a interview, not mine. Instead Sony is going to: 1-use DRDRAM 2-actually invest in the DRAM business to produce RDRAM (I think Toshiba, but I don't have the exact details, but I can post) 3-pay more for RDRAM (per your opinion) 4- and go through a bit of trouble to get.... Why? I can only think because it is a superior memory architecture. Also, think about HOW MUCH Sony has riding on this new game console. This is a serious business decision on their part. They owe RMBS NOTHING!! In fact, their last console did not use RMBS. IF DDR was better, why didn't they chose it? I am long RMBS but often times challenge the thread, so I will really listen to your answer. Regards, MileHigh PS- If you start talking bit, bytes, latency,etc...I will just ask again, why didn't they choose DDR if all that data is true?