Mircon are a bunch of liers and thieves. They have already been found guilty of infringing on Rambus' patents AND price fixing. They figured they will litigate Rambus to death; 99% of companies would not be able to defend themselves and would settle for pennies; this case will make an example of Micron and companies like Micron; and might even put them out of business. Samsung was smart enough to settle; Micron will and should not have the luxury of settling; they have had over 10 years to settle and have not.
Micron and Hynix invest Billions in factories and equipment and have over 43,000 staff on the payroll. Not to mention all the other companies in DRAM industry !! Many whom buy American designed automation equipment.....they create jobs for thousands of people around the world !
If RAMBUS had any guts and their technology was so superior! Why did they not build factories to manufacture memory chips ?
They instead held a complete industry hostage and demanded HIGH royalties. No wonder the industry had to do something ! How much fair profit do you need to feed a company with 300 employees ?
RAMBUS are like the mafia trying to get a piece of everyone pie .....without any investment or risk !
Is RAMBUS willing to deduct losses and risk "cost" from the royalties that have been made in the DRAM industry ? Forced by the industry to sell product at times for less than it cost to manufacture ..... ?
I am all for" fair royalties" for IP and innovation, but RAMBUS got greedy and pushed the industry into a corner. This is a fact !
Does it seem fair to you to give them 14 Billion dollars of profit dollars earned pennies of profit by Micron and Hynix investments ?
Lets bankrupt them both (Micron and Hynix > 43,000 people ) to save the lives of the 100 employees of RAMBUS and protect their IP !
As I said previously ...If the RAMBUS technology was so superior they should have built FABS or partnered with a chip FAB like TSMC.
They pushed the industry in to a corner.....and the industy pushed back !
I think you are backing the wrong horse my friend. Micron (which you spelled right in the subject line, kudos) are good people, and have been fighting the lying scum at Rambus for over a decade.
Rambus wins enough in court to have a few people still believe in them, those seeking the truth however know that these few are misguided and delusional, and have walled themselves off in a forum where they can delete opposing views, keeping the message "pure". This is normal behavior for them, they tried to hide the truth in this forum recently with one star aliases.
Be advised, they are very passionate about recruiting people to their side and will spread lies to get you to "see their point of view". In the defense of many of the "Ramboids", they probably believe what they are saying, which makes them even worse.
I advise you to research this topic well, and don't take anybody's word for it, including mine, and especially not anybody on the IV forums.
If you choose not to heed this warning then you have my sympathies for your impending losses in the stock market.
"Mircon are a bunch of liers and thieves."
Never heard of Mircon. Are they as big a bunch of liars and theves as Rambus?
"They have already been found guilty of infringing on Rambus' patents AND price fixing."
If you're talking about Micron Technology and Micron Semiconductor those statements are false. You should check your sources if you made any decisions based on this kind of "information".
"They figured they will litigate Rambus to death;"
Rambus seems to be quite proficient at litigating itself to death without any help from anyone.
"99% of companies would not be able to defend themselves and would settle for pennies;"
I don't think Rambus can afford to settle, they appear to have nearly bankrupted themselves and desperately need a "big win" from their litigation campaign to keep the sharks they've indebted themselves to from tearing them to bits.
"this case will make an example of Micron and companies like Micron; and might even put them out of business."
Whatever, they had a long run since 1978, too bad some upstarts came along and invented that DRAM stuff in 1990.
"Samsung was smart enough to settle;"
How did that put work out, by the way? What's this quarter's balance sheet going to look like?
"Micron will and should not have the luxury of settling; they have had over 10 years to settle and have not."
This BS has been going on for ten years? Ramscam should find a job or something. The world has passed them by.
Is Rambus Faster Than SDRAM?
1:01 PM - August 14, 1998 by Bert McComas
In this Rambus analysis I will repeat the same application modeling technique that I applied to SDRAM and ESDRAM in a previous article. Because Rambus is seen as a high-end technology, I have chosen to raise the CPU speeds up a few notches. This time the range is between 350 and 667 MHz. As before 2D (biz apps), multimedia and 3D loads are evaluated in standard architecture platforms and in UMA platforms.
This chart below categorizes and averages the results of 192 system simulations with Rambus and with standard SDRAM. The values displayed in this chart represent the average performance impact that Rambus introduces to each platform and its computational loads. The performance impact is not always positive.
Of the 96 comparisons, only 34 showed an increase in performance while 62 configurations showed a decrease in performance. The biggest performance advantage was demonstrated on processors and platforms aimed at the mid range and the low end.
A quick look at the average performance impact by CPU type below indicates that Rambus decreases benchmarkable performance by about 1% in standard architecture systems compared to SDRAM. However, the low-end UMA platform benefits from a 1-3% performance boost as compared to SDRAM. This would be somewhat encouraging, except that Intel is not expected to use Rambus in its UMA systems anytime soon. If Intel can convince you that Rambus is better, they will want to use it as a hook to sell more high-end systems, not more low-end systems.
In these high-end systems, users pay hundreds of dollars for performance improvements of just a few percent. The unfortunate reality appears to be that Rambus will take some of that away, while probably driving the system cost up even higher.
This is a strange thing for a CPU vendor to do. Why would Intel deliberately promote a memory type that reduces CPU efficiency? I can't answer that, but I must point out that the same question applies to the 740. Why would Intel promote a graphics chip architecture that needlessly sacrifices CPU performance?
In the case of the 740, Intel potentially degrades CPU performance by 10% in order to save a few dollars in graphics DRAM. Then, in the case of Rambus, Intel reverses its position and asks us to pay a premium for DRAM, while still suffering a reduction in performance. The whole thing seems terribly screwed up.
It seems to me that users are willing to shell out a few extra dollars to ensure that they have sufficient graphics memory, but I don't think anyone wants to pay an excise tax on all of main system memory unless there is a clear performance advantage. Doesn't this seem obvious? Does Intel see this? If so, what motive could they have for acting in this counter-intuitive manner?
I don't know if I can answer this question without sounding like a crack-pot, so lets just stick with the facts. (BTW - have you seen the movie Conspiracy Theory? Just because you are paranoid it doesn't mean they are not out to get you. As a matter of fact, it was the illustrious Andy Grove who, shortly before retiring, graced us with a book entitled "Only the Paranoid Survive ". A prophetic warning?)
When I ran ESDRAM against Rambus in the performance model, it produced the numbers below.
Low latency SDRAM not only outperforms Rambus for UMA systems, but for standard architecture systems as well.
I believe this is a broad enough representation to be considered "viable," but you can be certain that Intel and Rambus will scour the earth for a few benchmarks that can show a performance advantage for Rambus. Or worse yet, if they can t find one, they will write a new one in order to satisfy their promotional goals. This would be a definite red flag.
Why do you think they call it "Bench-Marketing"?