New RDRAM chipset "beats DDR by 50%" claim

[dexvx]

Originally posted by: Novgrod
yes let's all praise rambus, who have revolutionized the market with their frequent product releases.

Furthermore, they are clearly the future since all of one companies has seen fit to utilize their product. What were nvidia and ati thinking? don't they know that rdram will improve their performance?

I hate rambus because they were going to increase my bottom line by charging a tax on ram. I've given them enough time to be the wave of the future; if they were going to make something spectactular they would have done it already.

The i850 was the wave of the future. It is almost a 2 year old chipset that to date still matches or beats the latest and greatest of what DDR and Dual Channel DDR has to offer. It is very impressive if you ask me.

And FYI, JEDEC is not a megacorporation, it is more or less a group of engineers that develop standards, and yes their influence is huge nonetheless.

 

[Krk3561]

Ice9 needs an award! I have Rambus in my systems because it is superior, faster RAM than DDR. People need to stop bashing a business that is protecting their intellectual property and trying to make money, something all companies do. Instead you guys should be bashing Intel and Microsoft for the MANY times they have used others patented technologies.

 

[paralazarguer]

just like NO ONE would buy a 3000+ Barton if it were priced the same price as the 3.06HT P4

SNICKER

Anyway, I find it funny that if you look at tom's HUGE processor comparison from the P1 to present you can clearly see the P4 coupled with an "old" RDram chipset ruling the hen house. Yes, they did include dual channel DDR.

 

[Novgrod]

The i850 was the wave of the future. It is almost a 2 year old chipset that to date still matches or beats the latest and greatest of what DDR and Dual Channel DDR has to offer. It is very impressive if you ask me.

imagine that! a cpu that was built to work with RDRAM performs best with RDRAM? no . . .

Ice9, if you'll recall, intel was buying into many jedec members to push their rdram solutions. i somehow doubt they often take crap from companies like micron.

Fortune article on Rambus

furthermore, i can't help but feel as though your proximity to brilliant financial minds has as much to do with your financial senses as my proximity to NASA headquarters has to do with my knowledge of rocket science (none),

and so i find it spectacularly unlikely that ddram is unprofitable because of competition from rdram.

finally, KrK, i try to hand out crap even-handedly and microsoft is on the list-about-which-nobody-cares. intel would be right up there were it not for wingz.

 

[DX2Player]

That article is 2 years old, a lot of things can happen in two years. And besides you just admitted that RDRAM performs best with Intel chips (as rediculas as that is), so what is your problem?

 

[dexvx]

Originally posted by: Novgrod
The i850 was the wave of the future. It is almost a 2 year old chipset that to date still matches or beats the latest and greatest of what DDR and Dual Channel DDR has to offer. It is very impressive if you ask me.

imagine that! a cpu that was built to work with RDRAM performs best with RDRAM? no . . .

I dont think you can design a specific memory to work best with a specific processor. The processor does not care what type of RAM is feeding it because it is irrelevant. Look at the PentiumIII for example. It was built for SDR SDRam, but the i840, a is a dual channel RDRam implementation for Dual proc Pentium3's (since RDRam/DDR can easily saturate the P3's bus its pointless to compare) can easily beat a DDR based dual p3 solution, or for that matter even a Dual Channel SDR SDRam board.

 

[Ice9]

imagine that! a cpu that was built to work with RDRAM performs best with RDRAM? no . . .

Intel couldn't wait for JEDEC to develop faster technology when SDRAM was the norm. They needed something faster BEFORE DDR could make it out of the gate.

Ice9, if you'll recall, intel was buying into many jedec members to push their rdram solutions. i somehow doubt they often take crap from companies like micron.

Are you kidding?

Intel offered to REFIT fabs ON THEIR DIME so companies could manufacture RDRAM and meet demand.

Samsung took 'em up on it. Since then they've become the largest memory manufacturer in the world. And oh gee, they're profitable.

Micron declined Intel's offer, and decided to put all their eggs in one basket with DDR. They didn't want to pay the 3% royalty, and decided to take their chances in court.
Infineon: Same thing. The smallest fish of the 3. No surprise Rambus went after them first. Company not profitable. Recently lost in court. Way to go!
Hynix: Same thing. 2 bailouts so far from the S.K. govt. How are they doing?

Micron is the largest seller of DDR bar none. Lately, it's MOST of their business (the rest of it being SDRAM). They have ZERO capability of making RDRAM, and they don't make other memory types. They have EVERYTHING to lose if Rambus becomes the standard. So, let's see how they're doing lately, shall we?

http://biz.yahoo.com/fin/l/m/mu.html

Hmmm. JUUUUUST under $1 BILLION in losses last year...

How about the year before? Let's have a look, shall we?

Ok, DDR had a great run out of the gate, losing Micron only $625 million....

And how about the year before, when RDRAM wasn't even a threat?

$1.5 BILLION in profits. All wiped out since DDR hit the streets.

DDR! It's a winner!

As for your fortune article, shame the whole point of that article was 100% overturned by the CAFC, eh? The crux of it is:

"What you did," Infineon lawyer John Desmarais asked Crisp on the stand, "was work on new claims for the Rambus pending patent applications, and your intent was to make them broad enough that they would cover an SDRAM using the features that you had seen at prior meetings. Isn't that a fact?"

Crisp answered, "In some cases that was true."

In light of admissions like that, it's not surprising that the jury found that Rambus had committed fraud and slapped the company with $3.5 million in damages (which were automatically reduced to $350,000 under a punitive-damages cap).

The judge hearing the Infineon case, Robert Payne, concluded that Rambus' patents hadn't even been infringed. If other courts adopt his interpretation, Rambus will have virtually no way to prove that other companies infringed either. That could cost Rambus a significant chunk of its revenues, seriously imperiling its growth prospects.

The above does NOT take into account the one thing that matters: Payne was persuaded by Infineon's attorneys to BLOCK the Markman ruling on Rambus' technology, as your article stated here:

In March, for example, the judge issued a pretrial ruling that defined the Rambus patents in a way that made it virtually impossible for Rambus to prove infringement.

So let me get this straight. Infineon wants to claim they didn't infringe on a patent, but they want to do so ONLY after the judge throws out all evidence to the contrary with regards to the Markman ruling. If you know anything about patent law, then you know JUST how important the Markman ruling is. And it was in Rambus' favor from the get go UNTIL INFINEON'S LAWYERS OUTCLASSED RAMBUS' OWN!

It's no wonder Rambus won this case on appeal. There's NO WAY Rambus could have gotten a fair trial the first time around.

furthermore, i can't help but feel as though your proximity to brilliant financial minds has as much to do with your financial senses as my proximity to NASA headquarters has to do with my knowledge of rocket science

Maybe if you worked for NASA you could claim that you had a clue about rocket science... I would think that if you worked at NASA for 10 years, you would learn a thing or two about rocket science. Casual forum readers might actually listen to you if you speculated on why the shuttle blew up. Hey, lets face it. When you're around a load of rocket scientists, you learn a thing or two.

Personally, I work for Citigroup. A little known company that happens to be the largest financial conglomerate in the world. While our own analysts don't track Rambus, I personally do. I've learned oodles about the Semiconductor industry. I know how competitive it is. And right now, I see how fragile it is. I also see that Rambus is on FAR more stable footing promoting RDRAM than any of the JEDEC companies are promoting DDR. Only a complete idiot who ignores the facts would state otherwise.

and so i find it spectacularly unlikely that ddram is unprofitable because of competition from rdram.

You have a better explanation for why DDR companies are *dumping* it and losing money out the wazoo while Rambus, year after year, turns a modest $20M/yr net profit? And why Samsung, while competing just as furiously as the DDR big boys, manages to ALSO be profitable by subsidizing its losses in DDR with *profits* from RDRAM?

What, do you think Samsung is losing their shirt delivering all that PS2 RDRAM for Sony?

If you think that Rambus isn't the biggest threat to Team DDR, then I have this little known bridge in brooklyn i'd like to sell you.

 

[Novgrod]

You really think Micron is telling Intel what to do?

Really??

You really think JEDEC is a coherent body with a solid consensus, and that Intel couldn't buddy up to any one of them?

Sure micron is happy to hate RDRAM but I somehow doubt that the JEDEC members that were busily paying rambus royalties were actively looking towards its destruction.

the biggest threat to "team DDR" is that it's not a team, it's a bunch of companies in competition who happen to dislike rambus, but who are working at cross-purposes. Since they're in stiff competition with themselves, they can't very well sell DDR at a high enough price to make any money.

also, i suppose (rereading) i make it seem as though i question your basis for comment, which i ought not, but i have it out for financial analysts of all stripes after nearly taking a bloodbath at their hands on a couple occasions.

Rambus makes money because it has a unique product. If one company "owned" DDR and licensed it out to micron et al, that company would probably be making money too.

DX2player, last i checked i don't have a problem. i'm just going to hold off judgement on rdram as the be-all end-all of memory solutions until more cpus or gpus than those based on the p4 use it to great effect.

 

[Ice9]

You really think Micron is telling Intel what to do?

Really??

OF COURSE!

Here's how it goes:

Intel says: Hey, guys... We need you to manufacture RDRAM. Don't worry, we'll help you refit your fabs.
Micron, Infineon and Hynix go to intel and say: "We're not interested in selling RDRAM, Sorry. We don't want Rambus to control the memory market."
Intel says: "But guys.... we need memory for the P4!"
Micron, Infineon and Hynix say: "Sorry, we don't want to pay the royalties. We're going to make DDR. Rambus needs to go away."

So what does Intel do? Oh, hey, thanks for the nice segue, below....

You really think JEDEC is a coherent body with a solid consensus, and that Intel couldn't buddy up to any one of them?

OF COURSE NOT! Micron and Hynix were the biggest at the time, and they wouldn't play nice. So, they play "Meet the Competition".

Intel goes to Samsung and NEC, and refit their fabs for Rambus technology. Now, since they don't have the HUGE companies like Hynix and Micron to work with, they have initial demand problems.

Since they couldn't meet initial demand (new technology, poor initial yields, etc), RDRAM cost $1200 per 128MB of PC600! (remember those days?)

Now, it gets better. Suddenly, these few companies who are making money on RDRAM realize something... "Hey, we could do a lot of damage to those DDR guys who aren't manufacturing RDRAM". So they continue to make RDRAM while quietly lowering prices on SDRAM, and eventually DDR. While they start losing BIG money on DDR, they're able to subsidize their losses with profits from RDRAM... Ain't THAT a hoot!

So now, the one memory technology Micron, Infineon and Hynix have to STAND by and DEFEND in court is the one technology that's killing their corporations. It's hilarious to watch, really. Day after day, DRAM prices edge lower, the SDRAM/DDR-only companies lose more money, and the companies who are smart enough to make RDRAM (Samsung, and now Elpida) make money... Well, how you like THEM apples!

Sure micron is happy to hate RDRAM but I somehow doubt that the JEDEC members that were busily paying rambus royalties were actively looking towards its destruction.

Again, DDR is a GREAT tool to thin out the dram business! It's going to FORCE COMPANIES OUT OF BUSINESS! It's already KILLING the BIG THREE in DDR.

Now, think about the 600+ people who were LAID OFF at Micron today as a result of DDR being used a tool of their demise. All over a 1.5% royalty on RDRAM (3% on DDR/SDRAM). Shame shame shame.

the biggest threat to "team DDR" is that it's not a team, it's a bunch of companies in competition who happen to dislike rambus, but who are working at cross-purposes. Since they're in stiff competition with themselves, they can't very well sell DDR at a high enough price to make any money.

Hey, competition is great... I would LOVE to see another company develop a newer, faster technology that can compete with Rambus, and any of its other hundreds of patents it already has filed. So far, no one has been developing technology faster.

Rambus makes money because it has a unique product. If one company "owned" DDR and licensed it out to micron et al, that company would probably be making money too.

One company DOES own DDR. That company is: Rambus.

$1B of back royalties are at stake for SDRAM alone as a result of Infineon losing in court. Infineon has to settle now, and it's widely anticipated that they will do so. If they go to the supreme court, they risk having to pay TRIPLE damages that Rambus would be entitled to.

If they go back to trial, they cannot win because Rambus has earned back the right to use the initial Markman ruling in the supreme court, should this case wind up there. There's no way Rambus can lose now, since the raw fact is: Rambus owned the patents to SDRAM (and conversely, DDR) since 1990. The markman ruling is now re-validated and proves this, the fraud ruling was overturned, Infineon has no case, end of story.

 

[DX2Player]

Originally posted by: Novgrod
DX2player, last i checked i don't have a problem. i'm just going to hold off judgement on rdram as the be-all end-all of memory solutions until more cpus or gpus than those based on the p4 use it to great effect.

I dont think I ever said it was the end all be all memory choice either but to deny its potential simply because a unjustified bais against the company is rediculas. How happy would you be if they said your beloved DDR solution was able to push 9.6BG per second by the end of the year. The truth is the forums would be lit up and everyone would be extatic about the prospect, including me. But since it isnt DDR its downplayed by the likes of you. Honestly would you respond in the same manner if it was DDR instead of RDRAM?

 

[Oakenfold]

Personally, I work for Citigroup. A little known company that happens to be the largest financial conglomerate in the world.

You work for Citi and you are talking about all these other HORRID companies? :disgust:

You make some excellent points but be careful of the hand that feeds you...

 

[Ice9]

I dont think I ever said it was the end all be all memory choice either but to deny its potential simply because a unjustified bais against the company is rediculas. How happy would you be if they said your beloved DDR solution was able to push 9.6BG per second by the end of the year. The truth is the forums would be lit up and everyone would be extatic about the prospect, including me. But since it isnt DDR its downplayed by the likes of you. Honestly would you respond in the same manner if it was DDR instead of RDRAM?

DX2, Excellent point.

But hey, let's NOT sell DDR short. I don't necessarily think DDR is a BAD technology (hey, Rambus invented it As a band-aid to SDRAM, it's cheap to manufacture and offers speed benefits for the value sector.

But if it's performance you're after, you gotta go with Rambus RDRAM. Just like Cray and HP/Alpha did. It's just a matter of time before Intel bites the bullet and goes back to RDRAM. No one else is currently roadmapped to handle the speeds they need by 2004 (12ghz, was it?) EXCEPT Rambus. They're the only ones that can CURRENTLY pull it off.

This could change, but I don't see it happening with Rambus' aggressive engineers.

 

[Ice9]

You work for Citi and you are talking about all these other HORRID companies?

Guilty as charged. However, Citi was responsible enough to play nice with Spitzer and adhere to all of the corporate reform policies governing the research crap that went on with regards to Enron, Worldcom, IPO's etc.

Try to keep in mind that most of these "HORRID" things that happened were a result of a couple of bad apples/research analysts (like Jack Grubman who headed the research fiasco with Worldcom - and YES, he IS related to Lizzie Grubman, the famous publicist to the stars that mowed over a bunch of people outside a Long Island night club).

Anyway, not everyone at Citi deserves the bad apple stamps on our foreheads.

You make some excellent points but be careful of the hand that feeds you...

Just trying to be factual. I have ZERO interest in pushing Rambus from a corporate perspective. We don't even have coverage on RMBS. In fact, our own analysts have trashed Rambus pretty openly

But hey, there's analysts standing by a "Strong Buy" rating on Micron. Not all analysts are smart

 

[DX2Player]

Originally posted by: Ice9

I dont think I ever said it was the end all be all memory choice either but to deny its potential simply because a unjustified bais against the company is rediculas. How happy would you be if they said your beloved DDR solution was able to push 9.6BG per second by the end of the year. The truth is the forums would be lit up and everyone would be extatic about the prospect, including me. But since it isnt DDR its downplayed by the likes of you. Honestly would you respond in the same manner if it was DDR instead of RDRAM?

DX2, Excellent point.

But hey, let's NOT sell DDR short. I don't necessarily thing DDR is a BAD technology (hey, Rambus invented it As a band-aid to SDRAM, it's cheap to manufacture and offers speed benefits for the value sector.

But if it's performance you're after, you gotta go with Rambus RDRAM. Just like Cray and HP/Alpha did. It's just a matter of time before Intel bites the bullet and goes back to RDRAM. No one else is currently roadmapped to handle the speeds they need by 2004 (12ghz, was it?) EXCEPT Rambus. They're the only ones that can CURRENTLY pull it off.

This could change, but I don't see it happening with Rambus' aggressive engineers.

Im not trying to sell DDR short im just showing the bias in others twords DDR while acknowleging my bias is for performance. If you note I stated that I too would be extactic at the prospect of DDR at 9.6GB/sec speeds if it were anounced. I enjoy compatition and none of us should wish a monopoly in the market, I hope that RDRAM gets beat in performance as often as its the leader because: prices will fall faster, technology will be pushed to improve faster, and the customer has options. I am a consumer of goods so I want was is best for me and a competative market is what will provide that.

 

[Oakenfold]

But hey, there's analysts standing by a "Strong Buy" rating on Micron. Not all analysts are smart

Heh, I think it's more or less a matter of how they passed their CFA examinations.

Competition is definetley good, some of our memory makers(foreign owned and operated of course) would already cease to exist were it not for their own country's governments being directly involved. I guess Micron isn't doing quite so bad that they have not had the same support(obviously since they are a US company) otherwise they would not exist.
In today's globalization we will witness the fall of more organizations I'm sure.

Anyway, not everyone at Citi deserves the bad apple stamps on our foreheads.

By no means, I just have a personal vendetta with the a certain part of the massive organization.

 

[DannyBoy]

Uhuh yea, ahem ok.

What about DDR2?

Oh they didnt think about that one did they :|

 

[FishTankX]

Originally posted by: DX2Player
I have that board and its problems had nothing at all to do with using RDRAM, it had week voltage issues that could happen to any new board.


Why does everyone think RDRAM is so expensive?
Lets see the only thing that can beat 850E board (which has been out how long?) in terms of performance is the brand new SIS R655 with DDR 400
Gigabyte SINXP1394 = $230 Here
2x256 Samsung DDR400 = $158 ($79 each) Here
TOTAL = $388

Asus P4T533-C = $165 Here
2x256 Samsung 1066 RDRAM = $172 ($86 each) Here
TOTAL = $337

Hmm seems the RDRAM solution isnt that much afterall.

I call BS!!

The proper prices are..
Gigabyte SiS655 GA-8SQ800 112$
2x256 Samsung DDR400 = $158 ($79 each) Here
TOTAL = $270

Asus P4T533-C = $165 Here
2x256 Samsung 1066 RDRAM = $172 ($86 each) Here
TOTAL = $337

And i'm a hardcore RAMBUS suporter. But RAMBUS has lost the battle. They might not loose the war, but this round is over. DCDDR is cheaper and faster. Sorry.

Maybe when DDR prices rise the parity will exist again.

 

[Ice9]

Uhuh yea, ahem ok.

What about DDR2?

Oh they didnt think about that one did they

What about DDR2?

Not hitting mass production until... *COUGH* 2005.

Think they'll hit 100GB/sec with it before Rambus/Yellowstone? I don't THINK so.

I call BS!!

The proper prices are..
Gigabyte SiS655 GA-8SQ800 112$
2x256 Samsung DDR400 = $158 ($79 each) Here
TOTAL = $270

Asus P4T533-C = $165 Here
2x256 Samsung 1066 RDRAM = $172 ($86 each) Here
TOTAL = $337

And i'm a hardcore RAMBUS suporter. But RAMBUS has lost the battle. They might not loose the war, but this round is over. DCDDR is cheaper and faster. Sorry.

Maybe when DDR prices rise the parity will exist again.

Rambus hasn't lost anything

DDR has lost PLENTY. Money, benchmarks and otherwise. Dual DDR only COMPETES with RDRAM PC1066. It doesn't BEAT it, and it's had TWO YEARS to do so.

 

[DannyBoy]

Well at least itll be here

 

[FishTankX]

Ice9: SiS655 armed with DDR400 beats the i850E. That's the conclusion of Anand's review. It's lost the performance crown. There's only one benchmark at which RAMBUS still has a clear performance lead, and that's an isolated 3d workstation benchmark. In almost every other situation the SiS655 with DDR400 will beat the i850E.

 

[DannyBoy]

Originally posted by: FishTankX
Ice9: SiS655 armed with DDR400 beats the i850E. That's the conclusion of Anand's review. It's lost the performance crown. There's only one benchmark at which RAMBUS still has a clear performance lead, and that's an isolated 3d workstation benchmark. In almost every other situation the SiS655 with DDR400 will beat the i850E.

Thank You

DDR's my choice thanks

Dan

 

[Ice9]

Beware. Blatant facts follow.

Ice9: SiS655 armed with DDR400 beats the i850E. That's the conclusion of Anand's review. It's lost the performance crown. There's only one benchmark at which RAMBUS still has a clear performance lead, and that's an isolated 3d workstation benchmark. In almost every other situation the SiS655 with DDR400 will beat the i850E.

Oh god, this one is too easy

Now.

Is this the notorious "review" of the SiS655 dual-DDR400 board that they used <chuckle> a P4 2.26 as a testbed? We had this discussion on Hardforums. My id there is 'kweckstrom'. On Page 8 of the Notorious Rambus Thread from Hell(TM), I made these points:

Now, Anandtech:
http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.html?i=1784&p=7

What the HELL is going on here? A 2.26ghz CPU? How are you going to stress these new and great chipsets with an OLD CPU? I don't want to see how Ram performs on a CPU that's slow in comparison to the latest and greatest 3.06 Hyperthreaded CPU... USE THE RIGHT PROCESSOR if you're going to determine the merits of the latest and greatest board!! How can you EVEN find this review REMOTELY accurate when you're testing "speed and throughput" of a Dual DDR rig or RDRAM rig by crippling the entire test with a sub-par processor?

We know they HAVE a 3.06: http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1746&p=10

They use an 850E with RDRAM for *THAT* test...
We know they have Granite Bay boards.
We know they have dual DDR boarsd from SIS.
We know they have EVERYTHING they need to do a proper benchmark, but they don't.

Hey, now... has ANYONE done a P4 3.06 comparison of RDRAM vs. Granite Bay dual DDR (or any other dual DDR chipset for that matter) besides TomsHardware (who judged RDRAM as superior)? If we're gonna see which memory technology is better, let's STRESS THE DARN MEMORY SUBSYSTEM!

Interestingly enough, "Anderu" from that forum went on to Email the author of that "review" (Evan Lieb). His reply was:

First of all, this Kweckstrom fellow is sorely misinformed about Rambus
the company. It is a well known FACT that Rambus committed fraud when
they lied to JEDEC by filing for certain SDRAM-like patents behind their
back. Dare I say Kweckstrom defends Rambus the company because he is an
active Rambus investor?

Secondly, we use a 2.26GHz CPU because:

1) It reflects the approximate CPU speed most OEM PCs have been shipping
with in the past few months.
2) It happens to be a perfect CPU for enthusiasts (overclockers, gamers,
etc.), and therefore is an excellent CPU speed to show the superiority
of dual DDR memory over Rambus memory.
3) In the benchmarks we've run at 2.8GHz+ (and slightly higher, like
2.85GHz), the variance in scores simply gave us absolutely no reason to
use such a high speed CPU. I admit we haven't tested as high as 3.06GHz,
but I very much doubt the scores would change noticeably because of an
extra ~ 200MHz.

The reasons listed above do not apply to a 3.06GHz CPU, as this CPU does
not reflect the average CPU speed the majority of OEM PC buyers receive
(from Dell, HP, IBM, etc.), and it doesn't even reflect what the
majority of hardcore enthusiasts (overclockers, gamers, etc.) purchase
either.

Of course, you can read my responses on those pages, but i'll give you the gist of it.

A 2.26ghz CPU will NOT stress a memory subsystem the way a 3.06ghz CPU will. *ANY FOOL KNOWS THAT*. If you are trying to claim a victor in memory technology superiority, USE THE RIGHT CPU FOR THE JOB, PLEASE.

Oh wait, I don't think that chipset supports Hyperthreading, does it... I think they conveniently left out that little fact.

I'm not sure what this Evan Lieb guy had to gain from using such a junky CPU for this test, but we KNOW from previous Anandtech reviews that they have the correct tools to PROPERLY benchmark this memory subsystem.

So hey, does something smell funny to you?

 

[FishTankX]

Hmm.. I stand corrected. But will you please give me a link to the article on SiS655 boards on toms hardware? I see none.

 

[DX2Player]

Originally posted by: FishTankX

Originally posted by: DX2Player
I have that board and its problems had nothing at all to do with using RDRAM, it had week voltage issues that could happen to any new board.


Why does everyone think RDRAM is so expensive?
Lets see the only thing that can beat 850E board (which has been out how long?) in terms of performance is the brand new SIS R655 with DDR 400
Gigabyte SINXP1394 = $230 Here
2x256 Samsung DDR400 = $158 ($79 each) Here
TOTAL = $388

Asus P4T533-C = $165 Here
2x256 Samsung 1066 RDRAM = $172 ($86 each) Here
TOTAL = $337

Hmm seems the RDRAM solution isnt that much afterall.

I call BS!!

The proper prices are..
Gigabyte SiS655 GA-8SQ800 112$
2x256 Samsung DDR400 = $158 ($79 each) Here
TOTAL = $270

Asus P4T533-C = $165 Here
2x256 Samsung 1066 RDRAM = $172 ($86 each) Here
TOTAL = $337

And i'm a hardcore RAMBUS suporter. But RAMBUS has lost the battle. They might not loose the war, but this round is over. DCDDR is cheaper and faster. Sorry.

Maybe when DDR prices rise the parity will exist again.

Thata a stripped down version of the board, the one compared in anands review is the Gigabyte SINXP1394 (SiS 655-Dual DDR400) so thats the one i priced. But hay if you wanna play games how about this Here is a 850E motherboard with PC1066 RDRAM for only $105. But I was picking out the mobos from the review from the same very reputable vender

 

[SexyK]

Well it looks like I'm a little late to the party on this thread, but I'll throw in my stance.

1) I think it's absurd that so many (seemingly) well educated people can slam Rambus constantly over something they apparently know very little about.
2) In all reality, the price difference between RDRAM and DDR is non-existent at best. Top DDR400 modual (the only thing that really challenges RDRAM) is extremely pricey.
3) Most importantly, I picked up a Abit TH7-II when the very first S487 P4's were coming out, well over 18 months ago. In that time I could have gone through a i845, i845pe, and a GB board and still have never completely eclipsed the speed of my i850 board. I think that speaks for itself in terms of the engineering happening over at Rambus.

I really can't understand the backlash against RDRAM, especially from a group of people who preport to be obsessed with the ultimate in computer hardware.

kramer