Yeah it's SUPER, super out of stock that is - new RTX card rumors.

[Castdeath97]

Super? More like Super F5 mashing ....

 

Forget it ... back to my meat grilling overheating laptop it is.

[Mark Kaine]

10 hours ago, Sarra said:

I doubt it. The actual signalling wouldn't be there, and the controller on the die would be expecting specific capacity chips, if it saw double that capacity, you would either have half the bandwidth, half the capacity, or it would flat out reject the chips, and you'd basically have a card with no memory.

Bummer, I was afraid something like that would be the answer... 

 

 

[Mark Kaine]

3 hours ago, porina said:

Is the 3070 the 104 or 102 die? We know the 102 die certainly supports the higher density chips (3090 vs 3080)

it's ga104 

 

Edit: Anyway, ISN'T THAT SOMETHING LINUS WOULD COVER? 

 

"PIMP YOUR 3070, NOW WITH MORE COREZ RAMZ!" 

 

[D13H4RD]

Just to reiterate

 

"SUPER" designates a product refresh, and replaces the original. Much like how the 2070S replaced the OG 2070 (although it did not replace the 2060, as that one got a price cut in response to the 5600XT). "Ti" designates a complementary product with enhanced specifications, meaning that it doesn't replace a card, but rather complements it.

 

Of course, we now apparently have "ULTRA"...

[Mark Kaine]

9 minutes ago, D13H4RD said:

Just to reiterate

 

"SUPER" designates a product refresh, and replaces the original. Much like how the 2070S replaced the OG 2070 (although it did not replace the 2060, as that one got a price cut in response to the 5600XT). "Ti" designates a complementary product with enhanced specifications, meaning that it doesn't replace a card, but rather complements it.

 

Of course, we now apparently have "ULTRA"...

Yeah, is confusing, on purpose I'd wager, but in the end, we just know new, better cards are coming, soon. 

 

Questions are availability and pricing... 

[Sarra]

7 hours ago, porina said:

Is the 3070 the 104 or 102 die? We know the 102 die certainly supports the higher density chips (3090 vs 3080) and I'd be surprised if the lower ones didn't also. Look at it like desktop ram, you can put two modules on a channel instead of one. Max bandwidth is same, although there are optimisations that often lead to two modules working better than one. Logically this can happen within a single higher capacity chip also (like dual rank vs single rank modules). 

 

 

 

Elsewhere:

https://www.igorslab.de/en/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3060-ultra-12-gb-schneller-als-eine-rtx-3060-ti-asus-tuf-gaming-geleakt-2/

What year is it? The "Ultra" name might be coming back with this rumoured 3060 Ultra 12GB. For those who aren't as ancient as me, Ultra used to be nvidia's top model CPU, above GT.

when the GPU is made, they program the controller to the chips installed on it. This is why there are blank RAM spots, with all of the solder pads in place, but if you were to pull a RAM chip off another card and solder it on, it wouldn't be recognized by the controller.

 

It's also an instance where NVidia probably has the firmware locked, so it just wouldn't work.

 

However, if there's a 3080TI, and it has more memory capacity, it could be possible, assuming the actual memory controller isn't totally locked down, to flash the 3080 TI firmware to a 3080 or 3080 super, and solder higher capacity chips on it.

 

It just wouldn't be worth it in the end, though, due to the time and cost involved. It would simply be cheaper to just buy a card that already has the capacity that you want, like a 6800XT.

[SteveGrabowski0]

Honestly WGAF? Thanks to the douchebag scalpers and the ethereum miners these will all be unobtanium anyways.

[Bombastinator]

1 hour ago, SteveGrabowski0 said:

Honestly WGAF? Thanks to the douchebag scalpers and the ethereum miners these will all be unobtanium anyways.

Depends.  If Nvidia makes a card that sucks for mining but still works for games, or makes a special card that is cheaper for miners to use than cards made for gaming they could make things go. 

[SteveGrabowski0]

7 hours ago, Bombastinator said:

Depends.  If Nvidia makes a card that sucks for mining but still works for games, or makes a special card that is cheaper for miners to use than cards made for gaming they could make things go. 

It would have to be an RTX 3060 4GB or something 

[StDragon]

7 hours ago, Bombastinator said:

Depends.  If Nvidia makes a card that sucks for mining but still works for games, or makes a special card that is cheaper for miners to use than cards made for gaming they could make things go. 

The latter, not the former. If there was enough fabrication capacity, they would be making headless cards. They still might however depending on how the GPUs are binned, but that would be only if it's better than throwing them into the trash.

 

Keep in mind that CUDA cores are used for gaming. It's the same units used to mine crypto. You can't gimp one without the other.

[Craftyawesome]

3 hours ago, StDragon said:

The latter, not the former. If there was enough fabrication capacity, they would be making headless cards. They still might however depending on how the GPUs are binned, but that would be only if it's better than throwing them into the trash.

 

Keep in mind that CUDA cores are used for gaming. It's the same units used to mine crypto. You can't gimp one without the other.

AFAIK the most profitable algorithms/coins (Ethereum) want a relatively large amount of fast memory. AMD's infinity cache doesn't help too much. All 256bit GDDR6 cards (AMD's 6800 - 6900 xt, Nvidia 3060 ti, 3070) all have about 60 MH/s on ethereum.

[Bombastinator]

4 hours ago, StDragon said:

The latter, not the former. If there was enough fabrication capacity, they would be making headless cards. They still might however depending on how the GPUs are binned, but that would be only if it's better than throwing them into the trash.

 

Keep in mind that CUDA cores are used for gaming. It's the same units used to mine crypto. You can't gimp one without the other.

Headless cards had issues iirc.  Resale value problems lowered effective value.  They need to figure out some kind of mining optimized design to make the miners want those and not gaming cards. 

[Bombastinator]

4 hours ago, SteveGrabowski0 said:

It would have to be an RTX 3060 4GB or something 

That could be a solution.  Makes me wonder if someone writes an app that allows consoles to mine, what would happen to the white Xbox?

[StDragon]

1 hour ago, Bombastinator said:

They need to figure out some kind of mining optimized design to make the miners want those and not gaming cards. 

Math doesn't care about intentions. You're either calculating integer, floating point, or vector.

 

There's no way to hobble mining without effecting gaming in any worthwhile measurable way.

 

If you want NVidia to help crypto, they should just put in an order to make ASICs to compete against Antminer.

[Bombastinator]

21 minutes ago, StDragon said:

Math doesn't care about intentions. You're either calculating integer, floating point, or vector.

 

There's no way to hobble mining without effecting gaming in any worthwhile measurable way.

 

If you want NVidia to help crypto, they should just put in an order to make ASICs to compete against Antminer.

That would do it.  My understanding is the reason miners use gaming GPUs is they have a much better resale value which effectively lowers their total cost.  For a mining device to be more desirable than a gaming card there has to be a positive cost/benefit.

 

One possible solution is software based.  My memory is that as a general rule miners can’t code for beans.  It’s basically a script kiddie thing.  One possibility is to write code in such a way that it is advantageous for a given type of card. 

Edited January 6, 2021 by Bombastinator

[StDragon]

5 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

That would do it.  My understanding is the reason miners use gaming GPUs is they have a much better resale value which effectively lowers their total cost.  For a mining device to be more desirable than a gaming card there has to be a positive cost/benefit.

 

One possible solution is software based.  My memory is that as a general rule miners can’t code for beans.  It’s basically a script kiddie thing.  One possibility is to write code in such a way that it is advantageous for a given type of card. 

GPUs are used because ASICs can have up to a year (12 months) of back-order! If they can hack a PS5 to mine, they will and those will price way higher!

 

The quants have looked into leveraging anything from cloud based rental to malware sapping CPU and GPU cycles.

[Bombastinator]

1 minute ago, StDragon said:

GPUs are used because ASICs can have up to a year (12 months) of back-order! If they can hack a PS5 to mine, they will and those will price way higher!

 

The quants have looked into leveraging anything from cloud based rental to malware sapping CPU and GPU cycles.

If there are machines that work better than gaming GPUs and the problem is the manufacturers can’t react to the market fast enough, it stands to reason that there should be more manufacturers.  My understanding was ASICS are only useful for very specifically Bitcoin. There not generalized enough systems.  It sort of sounds like what is needed is something more cartridge based or something.  Make the things sufficiently adaptable. 

[porina]

1 hour ago, Bombastinator said:

My memory is that as a general rule miners can’t code for beans.  It’s basically a script kiddie thing. 

The typical miner doesn't write their own mining code for the same reason pretty much everyone here didn't write Windows code. Makes no sense to do so if there is readily available software that can be used. And there are often multiple choices for a given crypto, it isn't like there's only one person doing it in the whole world. But generally people will tend towards the best performing one.

 

1 hour ago, Bombastinator said:

If there are machines that work better than gaming GPUs and the problem is the manufacturers can’t react to the market fast enough, it stands to reason that there should be more manufacturers.  My understanding was ASICS are only useful for very specifically Bitcoin. There not generalized enough systems.  It sort of sounds like what is needed is something more cartridge based or something.  Make the things sufficiently adaptable. 

Once you talk about ASICs you're talking about getting dedicated silicon made. That is neither cheap nor fast. You're going to have to be sure about what you're doing is going to be relevant for long enough to make your costs back. For something long term stable like Bitcoin that might work. The risk/reward for other things makes it harder to do.

 

Haven't looked into it, but I do wonder if FPGAs can or have been used. See it as reconfigurable hardware, between something as general as a GPU, and fixed like ASIC. Not cheap but could make up for it by reacting faster than going ASIC route.

[StDragon]

2 hours ago, porina said:

Haven't looked into it, but I do wonder if FPGAs can or have been used. See it as reconfigurable hardware, between something as general as a GPU, and fixed like ASIC. Not cheap but could make up for it by reacting faster than going ASIC route.

It's a bit of a paradox, but if everyone could mine more cheaply, then the price of crypto wouldn't have the ROI that it does. It's basic supply/demand econ 101 stuff. In a round about way, if someone where to maliciously send out a virus that bricked firmware on mining equipment, whatever remained left functioning would gain more profit from mining as the pie has now shrunk.

 

Look, IMHO, once crypto goes "main stream", that's the time to leave the market. Never invest on the high end. And as the gold rush has proven, those that stand to profit where those making the tools, not so much those using them. Remember that next time you put on a pair of Levis Strauss jeans. 

[porina]

3 minutes ago, StDragon said:

It's a bit of a paradox, but if everyone could mine more cheaply, then the price of crypto wouldn't have the ROI that it does. It's basic supply/demand econ 101 stuff. In a round about way, if someone where to maliciously send out a virus that bricked firmware on mining equipment, whatever remained left functioning would gain more profit from mining as the pie has now shrunk.

We've got enough crypto threads directly or indirectly. Point of mentioning FPGAs was more about providing an alternative in the short term to miners using GPUs. What happens to crypto doesn't matter from a gaming GPU perspective. FPGA  based miner would still need someone to make and configure as it is outside the skills of most miners. So in that respect it is still closer to ASIC based approach.

[StDragon]

24 minutes ago, porina said:

FPGA  based miner would still need someone to make and configure as it is outside the skills of most miners. So in that respect it is still closer to ASIC based approach.

Technically, I agree with you. But it all boils down to ROI, and as I recall FPGA's are really expensive for the performance they deliver. It's very niche to where you want something better than CPU performance, but don't want to front millions of dollars for entry level ASIC solutions (as in totally custom).

 

What will be real interesting is what AMD will do with the IP from Xilinx. Will they incorporate elements of the FPGA stack in each chiplet.....?  Might make for more flexible mining, but I doubt enough to overcome the raw number of CUDA cores on a GPU.