What does "charging more" actually mean? It's charging more per-GB? More per-stack at same stack height?
If it's 2.5x more for a HBM2 4-Hi stack than a HBM1 4-Hi stack, is it really an unpredictable premium? The first offers 4x more memory at 2x the bandwidth of the second. Nowadays a mid-range GPU could use a single HBM2 stack for 4GB at 256GB/s, whereas back in 2015 a single stack of HBM1 with 1GB @ 128GB/s wouldn't do that much good to anything.
As for SK Hynix still not mass-producing HBM2, I wonder if this isn't the main reason for Vega's apparent delay (e.g. in late 2016 although they were using risk-production SKHynix stacks for Vega demos, they had to shift all their orders to Samsung for volume production of the graphics card).
Vega is about a year late at this point and low production of HBM2 overall is definitely the main reason. The only reason they can launch now is that Samsung finally has enough production for it. I'm not sure Hynix is the reason, just overall lack of available HBM2 and the subsequent high cost of it.
Poor AMD and their margins on vega... HBM2 was a bad idea, for a company that is in a very difficult financial situation to be an early adopter for something that is expensive, even more so amplified by the insufficient supply.
It was understandable for nvidia, as they put it into very expensive products with crazy margins, but vega ain't gonna be that. Whatever savings in power it may deliver, the heavy delay and rather low expectations for performance considering the transistor and power budget, vega will have to sell at a rather low price, which doesn't stack well with expensive memory.
RUMOR that Vega is incredible at mining, and have yet to hear anything on Titan XP's recent tripling of abilities in data from recent huge Nvidia driver release and whether or not that has ANY effect on mining with Titan series. Strangely quiet. Not even denials or only 5% or 10% and still not worth going that high green route.
Even if crytocurrency didn't exist, AMD would have trouble making enough to meet demand. Vega is extremely good at professional workloads (coming close to the Quadro P6000). The truth is really demand for high end GPUs is hugh and benefits both companies.
It's so good that the liquid cooled variant on average it's close to a Quadro P5000 in specviewperf (in some test is faster some is slower) while consuming more than double, the P6000 is in a different league
I am wondering if HBM2 is needed for Navi when they start "gluing" GPU's together with the infinity fabric which infinity fabric is also part of Vega but not really needed for Vega either. Could just be Vega is stagin in some things needed for Navi but are mostly increasing costs without a ton of gain until Navi lands which would make since due to how small AMD is they don't have to start from scratch with Navi. HBM2's latencies could help mining quite a lot will have to wait on reviews to see how much.
It's funny how many people see AMD as a small, tiny and fragile entity that must be treated with care while actually they have the same size as NVIDIA: same number of employees, similar revenue... Intel is a far different beast though
What 'Poor AMD'!! if margins for Vega are tight, then what this shows is that AMD is willing to keep customers loyal than poke em' in the eye- cant ever say that about NVidia. Fanbois, always a warped view...
Only if there are licences costs involved with implementing it. It's a JEDEC standard so I think that puts pressure on the inventors to keep licensing costs low or non existent otherwise it would put 3rd parties off from using it. AMD officially stated in the past that they weren't charging royalties which makes sense as they want production to be high to cover their demand. That doesn't mean they can't start charging in the future but that also depends on cross licensing deals they have with Nvidia etc.
Well yes, but the broader issue is processing power is by far outstripping ALL memory supplies to feed it.
AMD are at least addressing the problem with memory extension techniques via the HBCC.
A recent example of where they are going, is the 2TB $7k vega pro ssg.
The onboard flash storage/cache (~raid0 samsung 960 pro arrays) is native to the architecture of all vega fabrics, so i doubt it will remain exclusive to the top end for long. It also allows for 64GB of system memory use to extend the gpu cache pool.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
22 Comments
Back to Article
ToTTenTranz - Friday, August 4, 2017 - link
What does "charging more" actually mean?It's charging more per-GB? More per-stack at same stack height?
If it's 2.5x more for a HBM2 4-Hi stack than a HBM1 4-Hi stack, is it really an unpredictable premium? The first offers 4x more memory at 2x the bandwidth of the second.
Nowadays a mid-range GPU could use a single HBM2 stack for 4GB at 256GB/s, whereas back in 2015 a single stack of HBM1 with 1GB @ 128GB/s wouldn't do that much good to anything.
As for SK Hynix still not mass-producing HBM2, I wonder if this isn't the main reason for Vega's apparent delay (e.g. in late 2016 although they were using risk-production SKHynix stacks for Vega demos, they had to shift all their orders to Samsung for volume production of the graphics card).
Flunk - Friday, August 4, 2017 - link
Vega is about a year late at this point and low production of HBM2 overall is definitely the main reason. The only reason they can launch now is that Samsung finally has enough production for it. I'm not sure Hynix is the reason, just overall lack of available HBM2 and the subsequent high cost of it.Azix - Friday, August 4, 2017 - link
why do people keep saying this foolishness? vega was shown as earliest 2017 january. Prob first half 2017. yet people keep claiming over a year lategruffi - Saturday, August 5, 2017 - link
Vega isn't about a year late. It's about a half year late.StevoLincolnite - Sunday, August 6, 2017 - link
It's not even half a year late.Middle of the year is when we typically see AMD releases.
Fury dropped in July 2015, Polaris arrived mid 2016 as well.
However... AMD *needed* Vega a year ago to do battle with Pascal, that is the difference.
Veradun - Friday, August 4, 2017 - link
I agree with you, we need more infos to understand thisddriver - Friday, August 4, 2017 - link
Poor AMD and their margins on vega... HBM2 was a bad idea, for a company that is in a very difficult financial situation to be an early adopter for something that is expensive, even more so amplified by the insufficient supply.It was understandable for nvidia, as they put it into very expensive products with crazy margins, but vega ain't gonna be that. Whatever savings in power it may deliver, the heavy delay and rather low expectations for performance considering the transistor and power budget, vega will have to sell at a rather low price, which doesn't stack well with expensive memory.
Anonymous Blowhard - Friday, August 4, 2017 - link
Given how well Vega allegedly mines cryptocurrency, I imagine AMD could price them in terms of "organs necessary to sell" and still move units.crazylocha - Friday, August 4, 2017 - link
Still begs an answer to a very hot question.RUMOR that Vega is incredible at mining, and have yet to hear anything on Titan XP's recent tripling of abilities in data from recent huge Nvidia driver release and whether or not that has ANY effect on mining with Titan series.
Strangely quiet. Not even denials or only 5% or 10% and still not worth going that high green route.
Has anyone seen or heard otherwise?
lefty2 - Friday, August 4, 2017 - link
Even if crytocurrency didn't exist, AMD would have trouble making enough to meet demand. Vega is extremely good at professional workloads (coming close to the Quadro P6000).The truth is really demand for high end GPUs is hugh and benefits both companies.
Samus - Friday, August 4, 2017 - link
VR plays a big role in demand here too, especially with the Rift being $400 now...Sefem - Friday, August 4, 2017 - link
It's so good that the liquid cooled variant on average it's close to a Quadro P5000 in specviewperf (in some test is faster some is slower) while consuming more than double, the P6000 is in a different leagueFreckledTrout - Friday, August 4, 2017 - link
I am wondering if HBM2 is needed for Navi when they start "gluing" GPU's together with the infinity fabric which infinity fabric is also part of Vega but not really needed for Vega either. Could just be Vega is stagin in some things needed for Navi but are mostly increasing costs without a ton of gain until Navi lands which would make since due to how small AMD is they don't have to start from scratch with Navi. HBM2's latencies could help mining quite a lot will have to wait on reviews to see how much.Sefem - Friday, August 4, 2017 - link
It's funny how many people see AMD as a small, tiny and fragile entity that must be treated with care while actually they have the same size as NVIDIA: same number of employees, similar revenue... Intel is a far different beast thoughBurntMyBacon - Monday, August 7, 2017 - link
AMDMarket Cap: 12.7 billion
Employees: 8200
Sales: 4.27 billion
https://www.forbes.com/companies/advanced-micro-de...
Nvidia
Market Cap: 59.1 billion
Employees: 10299
Sales: 6.91 billion
https://www.forbes.com/companies/nvidia/
ash9 - Friday, August 4, 2017 - link
What 'Poor AMD'!! if margins for Vega are tight, then what this shows is that AMD is willing to keep customers loyal than poke em' in the eye- cant ever say that about NVidia. Fanbois, always a warped view...ddriver - Saturday, August 5, 2017 - link
Poor as in the opposite of rich adoygruffi - Saturday, August 5, 2017 - link
You are completely wrong. Period.yannigr2 - Friday, August 4, 2017 - link
Does AMD as a co designer of HBM get a price cut?smilingcrow - Friday, August 4, 2017 - link
Only if there are licences costs involved with implementing it.It's a JEDEC standard so I think that puts pressure on the inventors to keep licensing costs low or non existent otherwise it would put 3rd parties off from using it.
AMD officially stated in the past that they weren't charging royalties which makes sense as they want production to be high to cover their demand.
That doesn't mean they can't start charging in the future but that also depends on cross licensing deals they have with Nvidia etc.
Pork@III - Saturday, August 5, 2017 - link
"SK Hynix: Customers Willing to Pay 2.5 Times More for HBM2 Memory"
<center>WTF?</center>
msroadkill612 - Saturday, August 5, 2017 - link
Well yes, but the broader issue is processing power is by far outstripping ALL memory supplies to feed it.AMD are at least addressing the problem with memory extension techniques via the HBCC.
A recent example of where they are going, is the 2TB $7k vega pro ssg.
The onboard flash storage/cache (~raid0 samsung 960 pro arrays) is native to the architecture of all vega fabrics, so i doubt it will remain exclusive to the top end for long. It also allows for 64GB of system memory use to extend the gpu cache pool.