3 ms·
I think this may be specs for their Tesla cards. I doubt they would throw 32 HBM2 even on a Titan unless they can keep the price point the same (even for folks
by norea-armozel 11y ago
I think this may be specs for their Tesla cards. I doubt they would throw 32 HBM2 even on a Titan unless they can keep the price point the same (even for folks who can spend 1k USD have limits on their budget or at least their perception of a budget). But I wouldn't doubt by Q2/2016 Nvidia will be bringing more competition to the market with chips based on HBM usage.
IMO, AMD pulled the trigger a tad too soon on their HBM cards, but to be fair their last line of R9 and R7 cards weren't interesting at least to me (and I have a Radeon HD 7870). So, they had to go first to get their customer base excited for the future.
- noir_lord 11y agoSurprises me that RAM hasn't increased more, the machine I'm on is 5 years old and it has 2GB of RAM on the GPU (HD6950) which I paid ~200 quid for 5 years ago.
- norea-armozel 11y agoI think it's due to the heating issue on the boards themselves. HBM promises to make that issue a bit better since the memory chips are closer to the GPU which makes it easier to cool off than before. But there's a limit due to HBM growing vertically. So, I doubt we'll see massive memory chips on consumer graphics cards in the near future.
- icegreentea 11y agoMemory bandwidth/throughput has been a far larger bottleneck on gaming performance than total video memory for the last few years. They've been trying to deal it by using ever faster and slightly wider memory interfaces, but now they've hit the wall, thus the move to HBM.
- hajile 11y agoAs GPU history has shown, having an extra generation of experience with new things matters a lot (doesn't matter if it's GDDR3/4/5, fabrication nodes, specialized hardware).