Dicehunter
Resident Newb
I'm just curious but if cost wasn't an issue, Would HBM2 be the better option to have on GPU's rather than GDDR6 due to the much higher bandwidth of HBM2 ?
I'm just curious but if cost wasn't an issue, Would HBM2 be the better option to have on GPU's rather than GDDR6 due to the much higher bandwidth of HBM2 ?
If pricing wasn't an issue HBM2 had a lot of advantages. It is widely considered to use less power than GDDR6, and the latest HBM2 chips from Samsung can run a lot faster than the HBM2 that we have seen on GPUs like the RX Vega 56.
Samsung's latest HBM2 is actually 2x faster than the HBM2 uses on the RX Vega 56 per chip and can come in stacks of up to 16GB per chip.
https://www.overclock3d.net/news/me...s_hbm2e_memory_packing_a_33_bandwidth_boost/1
So basically, an RX Vega 56, if made today with the best HBM2 memory, could offer 820GB/s of bandwidth and 32GB of total memory over two chips. For context, the RTX 2080 Ti offers 616GB/s of memory bandwidth.
Other advantages of HBM2 include the lower PCB area that's required for the chips and the lower memory latencies offered by HBM, due to their more direct connection to the GPU core.
There is a clear reason why many workstation/enterprise-grade graphics cards use HBM2, the problem is that for a consumer product that extra cost and manufacturing complexities aren't worth it.
For gameplay GDDR6
If you compare a Titan V (HBM2) to a RTX Titan (GDDR6) they are close to each other in graphics performance but the latter runs a lot smoother with a lot less drops in fps when gaming. This is more noticeable at resolutions below 2160p.
That's nothing to do with the memory though, those two cars have essentially the same bandwidth & equal memory performance.
Its got everything to do with memory performance and clockspeed, HBM2 is just too slow at low resolutions and high bandwidth won't help.
There is lots written about how great HBM memory is on the forums mostly by people who have never used the cards side by side with their GDDR6 counterparts.