GTX 1080 > GDDR5X: 484 GB/s RX Vega 64 > HBM2: 484

File: Nvidia-vs-Poojet.jpg (111KB, 700x544px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 700x544px

>>61667556
to look cool and edgy while underperforming

>>61667556

>gtx 1080
>484 GB/s memory

Are you kidding?

>>61667556
bro just wait

>>61667681

sorry, i should've said 1080 ti

both do use GDDR5X

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_10_series

but that's besides the point. where is the bandwidth promised by hbm?

>>61667880
Not sure about bandwidth, but HBM doesn't take up as much room. It's tiny compared to GDDR

>>61667556
It's advantage is size.

>>61667880
Up rajas ass.

I'm saddened by the fact the 16gb version doesn't have anything extra either

File: zn6OFYF.jpg (30KB, 680x473px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 680x473px

>>61667556
HBM2 has absurdly lower latency that allows it to be used as an L4 cache

>>61667556
It's a marketing gimmick. We're not bandwidth starved.

>>61668791

link or gtfo

>>61667556
Because Vega is a pro/enterprise GPU first and a gayming GPU second. Plus AMD doesn't have the money and resources to do a separate consumer platform and Polaris doesn't really scale past the 580 tier GPUs so we get cut down Vega stuff with HBM.

>>61669881

implying that HBM is better for "enterprise" than GDDR5X

kek

>>61667556
the HBM memory controller is smaller, probably also consumes less power along with memory chips themselves

File: HBM SoC.jpg (26KB, 600x375px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 600x375px

>>61670151

i have no doubt that there are advantages to HBM over DDR, otherwise the industry would not have made such a huge investment in it. but BANDWIDTH was supposed to be THE advantage, and it ain't there. so WTF happened to Vega's HBM b/w?

>>61667556
Ones in bits and ones in bytes you gigantic retard.

File: vega10.png (31KB, 1366x439px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 1366x439px

that retarded gpu runs so hot, they probably couldn't afford the watts to clock the hbm any higher

>>61670197

try again shit-for-brains ;)

>>61669853
hbcc

>>61667556
Give back the core memory Ubuntu

>>61667880
It's the reason Vega has less frame drops, we only saw amd's charts but it's not difficult to deduce this if you read about hbm memory.

>>61670195
>so WTF happened to Vega's HBM b/w?
2 stacks of 4gb
Instead if the furyX 4 stacks if 1gb

>>61670235
You are an absolute retard, g is full of fucking morons who cant read.

>>61667556
HBM as the advantage of:
>lower power
>smaller (see Fury nano and Vega nano)
>lower latency
>Higher bandwidth (theoretically)
My only guess to the low bandwidth is only using 2 stacks instead of four like on the Fury

File: 08173345029175.jpg (109KB, 960x640px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 960x640px

>>61670137

Say this on my face, you fucking donkey!

File: 1280643569536.png (9KB, 493x402px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 493x402px

manufacturing/supply problems with hbm. that's why its bandwidth is shit and vega was delayed from spring 2017 to mid-august 2017

get your shit together AMD!

>>61670415
>Supply
>Bandwidth
Pick one

>>61670137
Even Nvidia uses HBM.

File: Screeching-for-Jesus-0.jpg (96KB, 600x448px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 600x448px

>>61667556
>expecting a normal conversation about videocard technology without fanboy manchild screeching

>>61667556
to raise cost and power usage for no reason

>>61674431
>power usage because of hbm2
haha no, kill yourself