A 2-year-old battle over the next generation of computer memory is intensifying as manufacturers gather next week to push a grassroots standard they hope will eclipse competing technology developed by Mountain View-based Rambus Inc.
More than 15 tech firms and industry groups are participating in what is being billed as an “industry summit” May 18 in San Jose, organized largely by Santa Ana memory maker SiliconTech Inc. While the event materials make little direct mention of Rambus, participants clearly hope to create a show of force behind the alternate DDR standard, which is vying with Rambus to be the technology that replaces the DRAM used in most new computers now.
The auricular debate,which comes on the cusp of an industry upswing brought on by demand for new computers, networking equipment and new consumer electronics that use more memory, isn’t about whether the industry needs higher-performance RAM. By using faster memory, computer makers can speed up the time it takes to store and manipulate information, a vital boost for processor-intensive applications such as voice recognition, broadband video and high-end computer graphics.
Instead, the fight is over which technology will be the new standard.
In addition to being the company moniker, “Rambus” refers to the memory technology it licenses, which is being pushed primarily by itself and microprocessor giant Intel. The technology emerged in the early 1990s as memory geared toward high-end machines made by graphics workstation maker SGI. Intel endorsed the Rambus standard in 1998 as the next generation of high-performance memory for ordinary PCs.
More memory manufacturers are hoping to boost acceptance for DDR SDRAM (Double Data Rate Synchronous Dynamic Random Access Memory), which was developed by Advanced Memory International Inc., a consortium of memory manufacturers. DDR is an open-standard technology that promises similar performance to Rambus’ high-speed memory but with lower manufacturing outlays.
Cost the Driving Force
“The five most important aspects of DDR are cost, cost, cost, cost and cost,” said Todd Rovazzini, SiliconTech’s director of marketing, nonetheless vowing that his company, along with parent Simple Technology Inc., will support any technology customers demand, including Rambus.
“Ultimately, it’s users who make that decision PC builders, communications routers and others.” Rovazzini said. But, he noted, “They’re motivated largely by cost.”
SiliconTech, Kingston Technology Co. Inc., Kingmax Technology Inc., Viking Components Inc., Toshiba America Electronic Components Inc. are among the Orange County memory manufacturers that say they will support both technologies. But even the most ardent Rambus supporters concede that they expect a wider acceptance, at least initially, for the lower-cost DDR, which promises a similar performance.
Manufacturing problems, including a flaw found last week in Intel motherboards designed to use Rambus protocols, have created delays and shortages that have exacerbated the dissatisfaction with Rambus.
Few memory manufactures will publicly criticize Rambus, citing contractual prohibitions in their Rambus licenses. But privately, several doubted the technology’s future and said their sales forces were having trouble generating demand.
And though Intel continues to stand behind the technology, the company has backed off its Rambus-only posture and will manufacture components used with both Rambus and DDR.
Chorus of Doubt
Critics, meanwhile, are raising a chorus of doubts about whether Rambus’ increased manufacturing costs are worth the performance gains.
In addition to licensing fees imposed by Rambus, manufacturers face equipment upgrades and reduced yields that can increase the production cost of a typical memory module four-fold. For a typical computer system with 64 megabytes of memory, that can mean a price difference of several hundred dollars.
Detractors also chafe at what they call a unilateral decision by Intel to impose a standard through sheer financial muscle rather than arriving at an industry consensus.
“It’s a little bit of the Not-Invented-Here Syndrome,” said Steve Cullen, a principal analyst for market research firm In-Stat. “DRAM companies generally don’t mind paying royalties to other DRAM companies because in the long run, those things work both ways and you wind up even. But in the case of Rambus, it’s somebody outside the industry, and they see a royalty stream that’s going to be one-way forever.”
Niches Sought
Despite predictions to the contrary from DDR advocates, Cullen predicts that Rambus and DDR will ship in roughly equal volumes within the next few years, particularly when higher processor speeds begin to accentuate the performance differences between Rambus and DDR.
Cullen also speculated that both technologies will find their niches: Rambus in desktop PCs by virtue of Intel’s support, and DDR in graphics cards and servers, where it has the early support of several manufacturers.
Others agreed that the market is far from deciding the issue.
“This war isn’t anywhere near over,” Rovazzini said.
