HBM When? How much?

[Mouse-Potato]

Looking for information about the HBM GPU's and when they will be out. I've seen some stuff by doing Google searchs but everything is speculative. I was hoping maybe some of the community might have more "in person" info.

 

 

[daniellearmouth]

The R9 Fury line uses HBM, and they're out now.

 

Outside of that, you know as much as I do.

[minibois]

now. 

AMD's Fury cards have (4GB) HBM memory.

 

Other than that, we dont know if Pascal or Polaris (Nvidia's and AMD's new upcoming GPu series respectively) will have HBM

[Interfectorem]

Well, HBM is already available to consumers through a few  AMD Fury series GPUs. Namely these below

• AMD R9 Fury X (XFX- $630) [Newegg-US]
• AMD R9 Fury (Sapphire - $520) [Newegg-US]
• AMD R9 Nano (Sapphire - $500) [Newegg-US]

[Xenift]

HBM 2 would probably be on the 980ish cards on Nvidia's lineup.

My guess would be that the 1070(?) would not have HBM2 because of it's pricing being competitive for budget to performance oriented PCs, just like how 3.5GB of VRAM is enough for normal games.

 

So expect it to be at a price near of a 980 for the lowest end HBM card.

[Nacho Marco Segui]

You didn't search much

[Mouse-Potato]

10 minutes ago, Nacho Marco Segui said:

You didn't search much

Yeah, probably not...

Maybe you'll have more info about Nvidia HBM?

[KemoKa]

@Mouse-Potato If you mean any HBM cards, then the Fury lineup are those. If you're looking for HBM cards that actually show a large performance boost as opposed to GDDR5... ehh, that's yet to appear.
 

Until we get the density that it promises, I wouldn't hold my breath for any miracles.

[daniellearmouth]

Just now, Mouse-Potato said:

Yeah, probably not...

Maybe you'll have more info about Nvidia HBM?

There's so little info about it right now that it's basically speculation right now.

[minibois]

5 minutes ago, Mouse-Potato said:

Yeah, probably not...

Maybe you'll have more info about Nvidia HBM?

other than the rumors about HMB2 or HBMX I think there is no info

[Mouse-Potato]

4 minutes ago, KemoKa said:

@Mouse-Potato If you mean any HBM cards, then the Fury lineup are those. If you're looking for HBM cards that actually show a large performance boost as opposed to GDDR5... ehh, that's yet to appear.
 

Until we get the density that it promises, I wouldn't hold my breath for any miracles.

 

4 minutes ago, daniellearmouth said:

There's so little info about it right now that it's basically speculation right now.

 

1 minute ago, Minibois said:

other than the rumors about HMB2 or HBMX I think there is no info

Pretty much what I thought.. I'm glad I'm not the only one that "didn't search much" for info.

 

Thank you for your input, I will hold off on buying a GPU atm and just use my 780 OC until it bottlenecks.

[typographie]

Earlier this year it was rumored that we could see GDDR5X on some Pascal cards, with HBM2 possibly at the high-end. That would still be pretty good news, as GDDR5X is capable of bandwidth approaching that of first-gen HBM:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9883/gddr5x-standard-jedec-new-gpu-memory-14-gbps

[KemoKa]

4 minutes ago, typographie said:

Earlier this year it was rumored that we could see GDDR5X on some Pascal cards, with HBM2 possibly at the high-end. That would still be pretty good news, as GDDR5X is capable of bandwidth approaching that of first-gen HBM:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9883/gddr5x-standard-jedec-new-gpu-memory-14-gbps

Lol. Yeess, let's make a new memory standard and slap a good ol' X on there, that'll make the fanboys squeal

[Guest]

OP so salty 

[typographie]

15 minutes ago, KemoKa said:

Lol. Yeess, let's make a new memory standard and slap a good ol' X on there, that'll make the fanboys squeal

Don't quite understand the complaint, but I think the rationale is sound:

"What is very important for developers of chips and makers of graphics cards is that the GDDR5X should not require drastic changes to designs of graphics cards, and the general feature-set of GDDR5 remains unchanged (and hence why it is not being called GDDR6)."

 

Would you have preferred another letter? 

[KemoKa]

1 minute ago, typographie said:

Don't quite understand the complaint, but I think the rationale is sound:

"What is very important for developers of chips and makers of graphics cards is that the GDDR5X should not require drastic changes to designs of graphics cards, and the general feature-set of GDDR5 remains unchanged (and hence why it is not being called GDDR6)."

 

Would you have preferred another letter? 

Yes. Any other letter like, i dunno, E for Enhanced or Extended. Anything other than the same overused, cliche, repetitive, pretentious, exotic-sounding X of generic eXtremity that literally every company on planet earth with a marketing department uses to pander to the clueless masses of 12-year-old little boys.

[MMKing]

2 hours ago, typographie said:

Earlier this year it was rumored that we could see GDDR5X on some Pascal cards, with HBM2 possibly at the high-end. That would still be pretty good news, as GDDR5X is capable of bandwidth approaching that of first-gen HBM:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9883/gddr5x-standard-jedec-new-gpu-memory-14-gbps

Considering that GDDR5x can reach 1GB memory per module, i doubt we will get significant increases in bandwidth across the board. More likely, AMD and Nvidia are just gonna use fewer modules to reach the performance we currently have. Probably some noteworthy gain in the 970/980 and the 390/390x segment, but don't expect leaps in the 950/960 and the 370/380 (and their x variants) segments.

[typographie]

37 minutes ago, MMKing said:

Considering that GDDR5x can reach 1GB memory per module, i doubt we will get significant increases in bandwidth across the board. More likely, AMD and Nvidia are just gonna use fewer modules to reach the performance we currently have. Probably some noteworthy gain in the 970/980 and the 390/390x segment, but don't expect leaps in the 950/960 and the 370/380 (and their x variants) segments.

Well, I don't know how much stock you put into the theoretical comparisons in the link I provided, but they broke it down by 256-bit and 128-bit versions. The theoretical 256-bit GDDR5X (such as you might find on an x70 or x80 card) was what neared first-gen HBM. The 128-bit GDDR5X was slower but still double the bandwidth of the GTX 960's GDDR5 at 224 GB/s. That's still a reasonable improvement from the R9 380X's 182.4 GB/s.

[MMKing]

21 minutes ago, typographie said:

Well, I don't know how much stock you put into the theoretical comparisons in the link I provided, but they broke it down by 256-bit and 128-bit versions. The theoretical 256-bit GDDR5X (such as you might find on an x70 or x80 card) was what neared first-gen HBM. The 128-bit GDDR5X was still double the bandwidth of the GTX 960's GDDR5 at 224 GB/s. But of course the jump would be smaller from the 380/X.

224 GB/s is a rather optimistic figure, as it claims a doubling in bandwidth, something the manufacturers never claimed. The claim is that GDDR5X will hit the 10-12GB/s mark, up from the current 8GB/s, with the ability to go up to 16GB/s in the future. So yes, a doubling in performance is not an outlandish claim in 2-3 years. But for graphics card releasing in just a few months, a much more realistic expectation is performance increases in the 25-50% range per module.

 

960 Pascal eqivelant = 140GB/s to 168GB/s. This is with 4 GDDR5x modules.