June 4th, 2000, 08:40 PM
It REALLY is all about the MONEY for Intel.
Yes, the money Intel makes on the stock is paltry by Intel standards $500 mil ain't gonna make or break Intel.
But what you forget is that Intel is the exclusive provider of the memory controllers for RDRAM on all 820, 840 based motherboards. Imagine if the 820/840 is successfull as BX. How much money does this translate into?
All the money off the Stock plus all the money off the Controllers. Hmmm, sounds like it could be a lot.
All of a sudden Intel does have a vested interest in pushing a technology that may be adequate or inferior. No?
June 7th, 2000, 10:31 PM
Everyone now seems to be coming out with new and new benchmarks and comments against Rambus. And yes, it is definitely not for anyone whe wants to get a system for under $2000. And hell, 820 chipset may even suck compared to anovercloked BX. But I always wanted an amaizingly fast system, and thats why i got an Intel 840 board, and di some of my own testing. If you run Quake III there is certainly no benefit fromm rambus, but when it comes to memory bandwith there is no beating it.
I ran my own SOFTWARE graphics demo (a lot of alpha-blending, fills, and special effects) on my OR840 system, and was AMAIZED - it really did run 2 times FASTER!!! then on an 733 with 820 chipset. It ran 3 times faster then on my old overcloked BX 502/112.
I also ran Java software demo (they have teh best software graphics library out there), and in Java 2D demo Composite (alpha blening & effects) demo I got 27+ fps, instead of 13+ on a differnt 733 system. I am sure that Macromedia Flash (used for web graphics)also runs 2 times faster on 840 then on any other system out there there.
So if any of you out ther care about software graphics, flash (web animation), or custom effects 2 Channel RAMBUS IS FOR YOU!!!
I am defintely ok to sacrifice 5% of Quake performance for 200% increase in memory bandwith. And if you are a power user it's definitely worh paying extra $1000 for.
My system: OR840 board, Coppermine PIII 733,
two PC800 128-meg Samsung ECC RIMMs.
So after seeing it myself, im definelty
happy that i didnt go along with Tom, and
got myself and 840 system anyway.
June 10th, 2000, 03:28 AM
I know it sounds very simple, but the word from Taiwan motherboard makers is that Rambus systems just aren't selling very well at all.
RDRAM, good or bad, is dead. If people don't buy the technology,it's not going to be around. People aren't buying it. Intel can't sell something that people don't want to buy.
They may well be fading out as a power broker positioned against the Asian consortiums of motherboard and memory manufacturers. They are losing their place. VIA and AMD only a short while ago were considered mere small time in comparison to Intel, now they have their products being supported by nearly every motherboard manufacturer. Things are changing. Even a company as big as Intel can get it wrong and has to live with the consequences.
June 16th, 2000, 03:34 PM
Does Anyone know what DDR FCRAM is. I read this was what Toshiba signed a liscense agreement with Rambus for. ???? I have no idea. Is it some form of SDRAM or is it some Rambus concoction??
Hoser (AKA Bum_JCRules)
July 21st, 2000, 12:45 PM
Dual channel Rambus, isn't that just more pins? What's next, quad channel Rambus? Sounds identical to DDR, just more complicated. Seems like a waste of time to go backward on pin counts to me.
I think there are quite a few better technologies than either RDR or DDR coming along in the next few years, should be interesting. That is, if the entire memory industry isn't help back by incompetant patent officials. They are the real villians in this, Rambus is just opportunistic and of course, unethical.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)