4 ms·
... and not by that much ... ... which is why projects targeting this are actually about scheduling tasks across nodes, not moving processing actually closer t
by dom0 9y ago
... and not by that much ...
... which is why projects targeting this are actually about scheduling tasks across nodes, not moving processing actually closer to the memory in the "let's put the CPU in the memory" sense.
- microcolonel 9y agoWell, for many types of compute, transaction latency is everything. Every time you cut the difference in half, you cut the latency in half and get twice as many dependent responses. Shrinking the process produces huge improvements. HBM exists for a good reason. You wouldn't stack dies (and hence reduce available thermal dissipation) if it didn't make a big difference.
- dom0 9y agoIt's in the name - HBM increases bandwidth. It does reduce latency a bit (since the electrical path is shorter), but the bigger and more fundamental latencies (row and columns) have not changed in many many years and are unlikely to. (It'd be possible to make them lower by proportionally higher power use and lower density, a trade-off which no one seems to be willing to make).