ZDNet heeft een artikel gepost over de hoge Rambus produktiekosten en het feit dat Rambus als gevolg van deze hoge prijzen op dit moment nog nauwelijks marktaandeel heeft weten te bereiken:
Analysts predict that over the next two years, Rambus dynamic RAM (RDRAM) will continue to be overshadowed by synchronous dynamic RAM (SDRAM), a less expensive and battle-tested memory technology.
That's a far cry from Intel's prediction two years ago that Rambus-based memory would dominate the desktop market by the end of this year, said Mario Morales, an analyst at International Data Corp., in Mountain View, Calif.
RDRAM will find its way onto only about 10 percent of the desktops shipped this year, Morales said, with that figure rising to 18 percent to 20 percent next year. [break] Paul DeMone van RealWorld Technologies geeft in een Talkback posting meer info over de oorzaken van de hoge Rambus produktiekosten: [/break] Rambus memory is more expensive than SDRAM and DDR and both the memory device level, the packaged device level, and module level and the motherboard level (impedance controlled PWBs cost more) not to mention the license fee for the rambus interface in the chipset. There is also the issue of rambus's high power dissipation, potential of heat concentration in a single memory device, and its effect on long term reliability. Even if rambus was produced in huge volume it would always be much more costly than SDRAM and DDR for all these reasons. It won't get a chance, at least from the PC market, because it doesn't offer anything for its high costs other than letting newbies impress other newbies with the clock speed of their memory. Why spend an extra grand on rambus memory? You could spend the money on just about any other component upgrade (faster processor, more memory, more disks, SCSI disks, faster graphics card, DSL etc) and at least have some performance benefit to show for it.