This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Nvidia Volta GDDR6

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. Nvidia Volta GDDR6

User Info: JYLE_BrH

6 months ago#21
Why should I care? HBM2 is still faster.

User Info: MasteroftheArts

6 months ago#22
DarkZV2Beta posted...
ajxh posted...
monkmith posted...
rendering 4k comes much closer to GDDR5/5x/6 saturation point then it does to HBM2.

Which means it's way ahead of its time. GDDR is still obviously able to game very well at 4K and it'll be another generation or two before people can reasonably expect to push things further than 4K/60 FPS.

AMD jumped on HBM way too early. It's painfully obvious after observing Vega. If AMD could have secured primary rights to the technology and developed it while still utilizing GDDR, I feel that Vega would have looked much different and/or would have released much sooner. But I'm guessing that AMD didn't have the resources to do that or their engineers were shortsighted about HBM.

Games are built around the market. In order for games to come out that need the bandwidth HBM provides, HBM needs to cover enough of the market. Otherwise, the game would choke and die on the majority of cards available due to lack of bandwidth, and no developer would want a game that the majority of their market can't enjoy.

Not only that, but Nvidia's decision not to adopt it across the board is very smart. Since the market leader isn't buying into HBM, manufacturers and suppliers aren't stepping up production. Because they aren't stepping up production, economies of scale can't hit and AMD are stuck paying a premium for what is still concept-phase technology. And on top of that, they've already burned millions into R&D for the technology as well, so they're heavily invested in its success.

I'd bet that if AMD instead stuck with GDDR5, designed an architecture that doesn't require a giant die, and a cooler that matches it's TDP, they could probably cut a fifth off the cost of producing a comparable HBM card and the GDDR card wouldn't lose performance. They're just dumb with how they design their cards and think adding more more more somehow bypasses technological barriers. You can't brute force your way to 7nm, and you can't brute force your way past the laws of themodynamics.
"I refuse to prove that I exist" says God. "For proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing..."

User Info: DarkZV2Beta

6 months ago#23
tbqh, I really doubt nvidia is scheming that hard. As market leader, if anything, they stand more to gain from HBM's success than AMD does, since they can afford to put cards out that use the technology effectively and reach a large enough target audience to shift the market, making their older products obsolete very quickly, which would pressure a much larger segment of the market to upgrade, buy their GPUs, and give them more money. The reality is that it's just not cost effective for them, given the low supply of HBM, and how much cheaper and faster it is to just adopt GDDR5X and GDDR6.

It was AMD that developed GDDR5, and nVidia had no problems adopting it once it was cheaper to do so. nVidia would rather just sell you cheaper cards for more money and make up for the lack of hardware beef with more efficient drivers and better engineering.
a quad core i7 was just a rebranded celeron -Pengu1n
Anything that has 3p fps or better is fine with me -mucloud
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. Nvidia Volta GDDR6

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived