4 ms·
Does that mean it's perfectly feasible to have more if one accepts a higher latency? Seems like there could be plenty of use cases where that's preferable.
by etiam 2y ago
Does that mean it's perfectly feasible to have more if one accepts a higher latency? Seems like there could be plenty of use cases where that's preferable.
- codedokode 2y agoGDDR chips already have very high latency.
- Lramseyer 2y agoNot exactly. The name of the game with GDDR memory is "speed on the cheap." To do this, it uses a parallel bus with data rates pushed to the max. Not much headroom for things that could compromise signal integrity like socketed parts, or even board traces longer than they absolutely need to be. That's why the DRAM modules are close to the GPU and they're always soldered down. Also, the latency with GDDR7 is pretty terrible. It uses PAM3 signaling with a cursed packet encoding scheme. At least they were nice enough to add in a static data scrambler this time around! The lack of RLL was kind of a pain in GDDR6.
- 0x073 2y agoLike the gtx 970 with 3,5 + 0,4 memory.