For those who were in the PC building/selling business back when RD-RAM showed its ugly face... it was a bad time for the PC business.
Intel was shoving RD-ROM onto the vendors as the "next thing". While many people remember the 820 Chipset debacle (PIII with RD-ROM used a Memory Translator Hub to convert the DDR into signals the PC could deal with since intel demanded RD-RAM - the very short version: CPU->NB->MTH->SDR) which meant VERY expensive, complicated motherboards. Or you bought a 820 board with RD-RAM slots and paid about $600 for 512mb of RAM, rather than $100~150. Then the failures happened, Intel got sued and and to replace motherboards/memory. The 815 motherboards were FAR better, built for SDR PC133 RAM and lasted most of the P3 life as it was FASTER and cheaper but had a 512mb limit (this was before Windows XP).
The P4 NEEDED RD-RAM to get any performance. But the early P4s were SO SLOW that P3 and AMD CPUs were easily faster with SDR. SAD.
But HOW intel really screwed the industry is that the memory makers were gearing up for the RD-RAM standard. Paying RAMBUS $$$ for severely
flawed tech (Fast RAM with very high latency). But, people were not buying P4s and the P3s were selling with VIA chipsets (SDR) since Intel had nothing to ship to support their P3 CPUs. Yep, there were severe shortages of SDR memory which drove the prices WAY up. Still cheaper than RD-RAM. Took about 6 months for the memory prices to stabilize.
Intel made the killed chipsets. The 440LX (PII) and the 815 was most noticeable for stability, performance and features.
And this... is why we DON'T have intel dictating the memory market, and hopefully never again. I'd actually would prefer if they stay out of the GPU market... but we'll see.