"To answer this cacophony of angry readers, Hardware Central followed the initial article several weeks later with another piece - this time backed by benchmarks. Very sadly, these tests were excruciatingly slanted toward RDRAM, while handicapping SDRAM. The Rambus endowed system had the most expensive and rare variety of RDRAM, PC800, which is particularly onerous since most RDRAM systems come populated with slower and cheaper PC700 RDRAM. At the same time, the Via system was burdened with slow CL3 SDRAM, while the true contender, the Intel 440BX based system, was sabotaged by forcing it to run its SDRAM and processor bus at a much slower 100 MHz.
Even despite these machinations, the test results show effectively a performance wash-out, despite the extreme price premium for the RDRAM system. Somehow, in spite of the sagging (and, in actuality, invalid) results, the conclusion is resoundingly upbeat and attempts to paint their test findings as conclusive confirmation of RDRAM's great promise.
Perhaps as a testimonial to the character of Rambus Inc. itself, this dubious article appears several times as a link on Rambus's corporate site as a presumably relaible independent review of their technology.
Even our friend Anand Lal Shimpi of AnandTech wrote an uncharacteristically soapy eyed article on this technology recently that seemed to closely follow the Rambus company line. To his credit, however, Anand has followed this questionable article with a new one backed with benchmarks which largely substantiate the condemning results that Dr. Thomas Pabst derived months ago."
Sander Sassen Quote
___________________________________________ Just to satisfy your curiousity, I have a masters degree in computer science and a bachelors in micro-system technology; you can rest assured that I'm capable and on top of things.
Not meaning to be insulting or anything, heck I have done it plenty times myself too.. but reading that reminded me of a article I read yesterday.. check it out at..
First and formost let me state that I am NOT a hardware guru, at best I could hope to call myself is a power user.
<<But if you feel Rambus is bad from the roots up and isn't worth the penny in your pocket, why read the article in the first place?>>
It is for EXACTALY the reason I stated above. I am intrested in obtaining as much information as possable before I part with that penny. Ergo I suspose I am "in my right mind" according to your critera.
<<What I see happening here is what happened to Betamax, VCR-2000, DCC and all of those other concepts that did have potential, but never made it big time. All those concepts have quietly gone away due to the fact that negative press was blown out of proportion and completely did away with any positive press.>>
I think this is the main rub for psudeo technical folks like myself. It's one thing for a concept to have "potential" but it's quite another for that concept to be rushed to market and ask me to part with that penny for something that even you admit doesn't meet the hype of its potential. I have to bust my *** for my pennys and I highly resent "positive press" that tells me less than the whole story. It is not encumbent on myself to support a product via the market place until it reaches its potential. It's bad enough that buggy software is tolerated in the market but buggy hardware is inexcuseable. If this technology was not being sold yet then this discussion would have a compleatly diffrent flavor, however since it IS being sold and is being pushed as the next great preformance enhancer I find these comments are relavent and appropiate. To raise doubts as to the motives of individuals who point out issues that can help inform a potental consumer of performance problems makes me severly doubt your own motives in this, all your other claims aside. It's one thing to argue merits rather than point out flaws, but when money is on the line (especially the astronomical sums being considered here) I have no problem with "herds of them all flocking together to 'kill' any pro-Rambus/Intel information from the start." I believe it is encumbant upon the producers of the technology to rise above the bad press. If they can not do so via real world performance then it is my ferverant hope that the technology go the way of the dodo bird. Better to loose the promise of potential than be saddled with an inefficent, costly propritary standard simply because a powerful company made a loosing bet. A truly good idea will always win out in the end.