May 9th, 2000, 05:55 AM
First of all, it IS easy to flame, but then I'd say, when you flame do so in style. (Do it with facts).
Personally I welcome this article, it shows RDRAM in another light. But as others allready pointed out, it is clear in pointing out the merits of RDRam versus the 'bad' things in SDRam. And I am missing the 'bad' things of RDRam, cauz when it's that good, why does it fail to outperform SDRam ?
My it is because your used sources did hide this information from you ?
Also I'd rather see a comparison of RDRam vs. DDRam. Since there almost 'equal' in age and and have a similair bandwidth. Micron itself has allready stated that allthough the bandwidth of the newest types of DDRam is higher, due to it's less efficient protocol it approaches that of RDRam. (Sorry no link for support)
Then again (dunno where I read it but) this might be one of those attempts of Intel to seize control over the (pc)world again.
For a personal note...I keep saying this is a smelly kinda memory.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)