You mischaracterize what "Intel said." During the trial, the cartel produced two former low level Intel employees who spoke of an internal Intel roadmap. Intel is a very large organization with a lot of employees, not all of whom have the same opinions about techology and the way Intel should go. Just because two low level former employees did not like Rambus and imagine that Intel was lying to the world about it's intentions surrounding RDRAM doesn't make it so.
I just provided what "Intel said", from the very top of the organization. Want more? Here's what Pat Gelsinger, Intel's former VP of Desktop Products said at the 2000 Intel Developer Forum:
"We're not changing our memory strategy. We need a next generation technology and the best way to accomplish that is RDRAM (Rambus memory). He said that Intel was incorporating two channels of Rambus memory into its future chipsets to emphasise that. "Our roadmap is not very different from what it was before," he said. "We'll ship multi millions of i820 [chipsets] in the next quarter, and some of these will be in two + two configurations, mixing synchronous memory and Rambus memory." That confirms our earlier story of a new rev of Caminogate which combines the two disparate memory standards. He said: "We do expect that the launch of RDRAM into the value sector will be longer and slower than we thought." The introduction of technology such as Willamette needed two channels of such memory to be able to deliver speeds in excess of 3GHz per second, he said. "We are not deploying or building products that use DDR in the mobile or desktop space. It [DDR] is too late, too little, it doesn't work and it doesn't fit in the desktop,"