4 ms·
To some extent , that's not really that impressive. AMD gets access to a breakthrough technology like HBM and 2.5D silicon interposers , and all we get is just
by minthd 11y ago
To some extent , that's not really that impressive. AMD gets access to a breakthrough technology like HBM and 2.5D silicon interposers , and all we get is just a measly 50% improvement in memory bandwidth ?
A more interesting configuration would be attaching 12 1GB HBM chips to the gpu , and achieving a memory bandwidth of 128GB/s * 12 = 1.5Tbyte/sec (would increase power only by 30W over current model).
Maybe their gpu is too weak to support such massive memory bandwidth, and it would be quite hard to do so ?
- timeu 11y agoaccording to the source, the issue is with the chip size: One problem with HBM is especially an issue for large GPUs. High-end graphics chips have, in the past, pushed the boundaries of possible chip sizes right up to the edges of the reticle used in photolithography. Since HBM requires an interposer chip that's larger than the GPU alone, it could impose a size limitation on graphics processors. When asked about this issue, Macri noted that the fabrication of larger-than-reticle interposers might be possible using multiple exposures, but he acknowledged that doing so could become cost-prohibitive. Fiji will more than likely sit on a single-exposure-sized interposer, and it will probably pack a rich complement of GPU logic given the die size savings HBM offers. Still, with HBM, the size limits are not what they once were.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- TheLoneWolfling 11y agoOffhand, I'd be more worried about the interference. 1.5Tb/s is an large amount of bandwidth to have running in close proximity along adjacent connectors.
- kllrnohj 11y agoI have no idea how you could possibly choose "measly" as the adjective to pair with "50% improvement in memory bandwidth" (with the part about "using half as much power" being suspiciously missing from your summary).