Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Bye Bye RAMBUS Mbababababaaa

Last response: in CPUs
Share
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
July 27, 2001 10:11:03 AM

Ahaha
lol

Main page side panel news

Bye Bye Rambus
lol

Stupid Intel!

--call it what you wish, with this machine I can make mercury flow in 3 directions at once--
July 27, 2001 1:05:17 PM

What's good about Rambus going down the tubes? They may be a rather obnoxious company to deal with, but their design is better than the competition.
July 27, 2001 1:28:01 PM

Their technology WAS better than the competition. But that situation changed months ago.

Do you know what they tried to pull? Their just a bunch of crooks.


<font color=red><i>Tomorrow I will live, the fool does say
today itself's too late; the wise lived yesterday
Related resources
July 27, 2001 2:48:54 PM

Have you read the article? Taiwan is EXPECTING more ORDERS for DRAM than RDRAM.
That doesn't mean a whole lot. Definitely doesn't mean that Rambus is going out of business. Hopefully they will, but this article isn't the pell of doom.

-----------------
Whoever thinks up a good sig for me gets a prize :wink:
July 27, 2001 4:48:26 PM

[really confused look]

What does RAMBUS's legal insanity have to do with their technological design?

<font color=blue>R</font color=blue>DRAM i<font color=orange>s stil</font color=orange><font color=red>l desig</font color=red>ned better<font color=green> than S</font color=green><font color=purple>DRAM. RDRA</font color=purple><font color=yellow>M just h</font color=yellow><font color=blue>as a blo</font color=blue><font color=purple>ody fre</font color=purple>aking PoS<font color=white> company</font color=white><font color=blue> pushing th</font color=blue><font color=green>e technolo</font color=green><font color=red>gy and overc</font color=red>harging for it.

(Please forgive any acts of insanity as I desperately try to purge some stray sanity from my system.)

-Intelicide: The act of marketing overriding engineers to kill a product before it can be released.
July 29, 2001 3:37:02 AM

*shrugs* RDRAM sucks like EDO... have any idea how expensive EDO ram is? it's not because one is expensive... it's because you gotta buy two! I think RDRAM has to be in pairs right? any technology like that sucks. just remember EDO... 64MB EDO (i think.. might have been 32) last time i saw it was 80 bucks.. now you gotta pair those for it to work!

My sig is better then your's!
July 29, 2001 3:51:30 AM

really? wow! that must of cost you a good buck!

check this out.. with my 486SX25 system it had a whopping 4megs of ram! wasn't even edo this was old stuff.. 72pin simm non edo stuff ok lol (back then that was like top of the line because people were still using 30 pin simms).. and we upgraded from 4mb to 8mb so we can play doom (lol) .. cost over 200 bucks US for that 4 meg stick! lol! now you can buy 512MB of DDR-sdram or 128 RDRAM for the same price.. doesn't that just make you sick?

My sig is better then your's!
July 29, 2001 8:48:45 AM

better than the competition? yes and better in cost too!

A DDR 2.1GB/s with Athlon 1G is much better than RDRAM 3.2G with 1.5G P4!

Bye bye RDRAM for now, and may you return with single module design, 133+ MHz speed, 8+ bit width and no Rambus Corp. sign! RDRAM 128MB stick: $40

girish

<font color=blue>die-hard fans don't have heat-sinks!</font color=blue>
July 29, 2001 10:08:11 AM

wishful thinking!

<font color=blue>die-hard fans don't have heat-sinks!</font color=blue>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
July 29, 2001 11:56:16 AM

Do you guys even remember RamDoubler? Now, those times were rough!
deez
July 29, 2001 12:59:17 PM

Yes, memory was also cheap in those days (NOT!). My first 16MB simm cost me a whopping $475 in the early '90s and I thought it was a bargain. Sheesh, I just received a 256MB 2100 DDR Crucial stick for less than $45. I paid more than that for a 128MB PC133 SDR stick just a few months ago.

"...you can always tell the pioneers, they're the ones with the arrows in their backs."

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by edison on 07/29/01 09:01 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
July 29, 2001 9:55:28 PM

I agree, RDRAM is not intrinsicly a bad product, its had a goodband width, its used to great effect in the PS2, but I would argue that compared to SDRAM (SDR and DDR) which are bith much more mature products by virtue that the amount of expertise that has gone into developing the SDRAM standard is infinitly greater than a comparatively small intellectual property oufit. So my point is that RDRAM has its flaws and that Rambus should flow its profits to making their technology more competitive rather than leaning the pockets of its legal department.
I should just close with saying that if they cranck up that bandwidth and maybe cut down the latency penalty a tad, and see if they can widith their manufacturing partners, refine the manufacturing process, they should have a a more competitive product.

Must go faster, must go faster,
Heck, processors fried...
July 30, 2001 6:09:31 AM

i agree, Rambus should get off the royalty or reduce it to some reasonable value, and work on the technology to 1. reduce the latency (the most basic thing), 2. make a single module design (which will kill its dual-channel architecture but we have other things to compensate it), 3. increase the base clock (like 1600MHz from 800) and 4. increase the bus width (maybe 32 from 8). with that its bandwidth should go well beyond 3.2GB/s, maybe around 10.3GB/s, thats four fold increase! and we havent talked about the host bus yet. its increase frmo 100 to 133 is inevitable but it could go even beyond that, maybe 150.

girish

<font color=blue>die-hard fans don't have heat-sinks!</font color=blue>
July 30, 2001 6:24:20 AM

Rambus may be knocked down but not for the full count.
Bad or good we'll still hear from Rambus. At least for the sake of competition.
They may only have a tiny percentage of memory market but if they were entirely wiped out I would bet the price of SDR and DDR would start to climb.

<font color=green>I miss the smell of leaded gasoline!</font color=green>
July 30, 2001 2:36:28 PM

<<<Bye bye RDRAM for now, and may you return with single module design>>>

the reason it uses 2 modules is to double the bandwidht. if it was single channel it would be 1/2 as fast. u only wish you had dual channel ddr.
July 30, 2001 2:44:12 PM

Yeup, very true.
And as a side note, RDRAM does <font color=red>not</font color=red> have more bandwith than DDR. It's 16-bit, whereas SDRAM is 64-bit. That makes up the difference in speed, although it's close.

The major difference between the two is their latency, though I'll leave that for someone more qualified to speak on.

-----------------
Whoever thinks up a good sig for me gets a prize :wink:
July 30, 2001 2:55:32 PM

The performance between RDRAM and DDR SDRAM isn't that much. The price is still about twice as DDR. I don't think ddr price will go up if rambus went bust. Memory prices fluctuated like anything even before rambus.

Heres a <A HREF="http://www.fortune.com/indexw.jhtml;jsessionid=YXWMI5Y2ICBM0QAMEHTSFFKABQQ4KIV2?channel=artcol.jhtml&doc_id=203141&page=1&_DARGS=/artcol.jhtml.3_A&_DAV=artcol.jhtml" target="_new">good read</A> on Rambus. It has some of the reasons for my previous comment.


<font color=red><i>Tomorrow I will live, the fool does say
today itself's too late; the wise lived yesterday
!