Personal computing discussed
Moderators: renee, Flying Fox, morphine
whm1974 wrote:For moment I'll say the second one. It would be too expensive and a lot of folks won't like the idea of being limited to 16GB of memory anyway.
just brew it! wrote:whm1974 wrote:For moment I'll say the second one. It would be too expensive and a lot of folks won't like the idea of being limited to 16GB of memory anyway.
I would hazard a guess that the vast majority of APU users wouldn't feel constrained by 16GB.
Vhalidictes wrote:That's a really good idea for a APU that would have unified memory anyways, but the main variable is the cost. I don't know the bulk pricing but DDR4 can only be cheaper, possibly a lot cheaper.
EDIT: The PS4 and the Xbone kind of answered this question already, HBM bandwidth would help a lot in some cases but always cost more.
whm1974 wrote:For moment I'll say the second one. It would be too expensive and a lot of folks won't like the idea of being limited to 16GB of memory anyway.
Vhalidictes wrote:Nope. The Xbone uses DDR3, I never found out why but I always thought it came down to cost in the end. Different technology, but similar in the bandwidth differences - the PS4 et al has way more.
Speaking about motherboard design, if anything it should be a lot simpler because the HBM would be on the APU package. A lot less traces on the board for sure.
synthtel2 wrote:Some purported (marginally better than WCCFTech-grade, in my estimation) numbers came up in Beyond3D's Vega mega-thread, probably in the page 110~130 ballpark IIRC. That wasn't the source, but that's where I recall seeing such numbers. HBM2 wasn't looking particularly pricey.
HBM's performance isn't ideal for CPU-side use. If the workload is all about sequential bandwidth, it's great, but if you've got more random access patterns, it's garbage.
The XB1/S mostly get away with DDR3 against the PS4's GDDR5 because the XBoxes also have 32MB ESRAM. Scorpio is ditching that two-tier setup in favor of wider GDDR5 than Sony.
synthtel2 wrote:HBM's performance isn't ideal for CPU-side use. If the workload is all about sequential bandwidth, it's great, but if you've got more random access patterns, it's garbage.
Waco wrote:synthtel2 wrote:HBM's performance isn't ideal for CPU-side use. If the workload is all about sequential bandwidth, it's great, but if you've got more random access patterns, it's garbage.
I disagree with this statement. A very slight increase in memory latency (on the order of 15% or so, worst case) isn't enough to matter for 99.99999% of workloads. The increased bandwidth by 4x+ makes a larger difference.
Any evidence to back up the assertion?
Chrispy_ wrote:Given that there are plenty of laptops on the market that come with only 4 or 8GB of soldered RAM and no extra DIMM slots, I don't think the limitations of a 16GB APU would be a problem.
IIRC, one of the big advantages of HBM is the lower power draw than GDDR5, but I'm not sure if it's lower power than DDR4. I know some budget laptops use DDR3 instead of GDDR5 simply because of power consumption, and that within the power budget, using DDR3 frees up some watts and allows higher core clocks on those DDR3 parts than their GDDR5 equivalents.
Either way, I think a Zen/Vega-based APU with HMB2 would actually be a very high performance part for mobile. Probably not cost-effective on the desktop though....
Doctor Venture wrote:It's funny. She complains about her Win10 box, even though when I close the 80 bazillion things she has open, it's lightning fast, but she doesn't complain about her circa 2011 iMac, which takes a lot longer to load her programs. *shrug*
Chrispy_ wrote:I tolerate my MBP. It's a nice piece of hardware and arguably one of the best ways to use Unix of any flavour.
Doctor Venture wrote:I wonder if AMD might include 16GB HBM2 in a possible Zen2 or Zen3 based APU, and completely eliminate the need for RAM on the motherboard?
MileageMayVary wrote:Doctor Venture wrote:I wonder if AMD might include 16GB HBM2 in a possible Zen2 or Zen3 based APU, and completely eliminate the need for RAM on the motherboard?
I actually think this is a good possibility. Though I wouldn't eliminate RAM entirely from the picture; maybe some models would eliminate it but don't remove it from all systems so that people can expand beyond the HBM capacity.
So maybe a workstation build might look like
L1 32K > L2 1MB > L3 32MB > HBM 16GB > RAM 128GB > SSD Pagefile.
Chrispy_ wrote:
I know. RDF in full effect, or Stockholm Syndrome.
You have to wonder why there's there's so much anti-Apple attitude among power users and knowledgable folk, and I think part of it is hatred of the fact that their marketing genuinely brainwashes people into thinking Mac is better than PC, when it's so obviously not true a lot of the time.
I tolerate my MBP. It's a nice piece of hardware and arguably one of the best ways to use Unix of any flavour but it's not perfect; They keyboard layout sucks for anything other than OSX and it's pretty heavy and underpowered for its size/weight class. I'd much rather take a light plastic Clevo if I was actually requiring something mobile - and it seems that finally the other manufacturers have caught up and you no longer have to buy an Apple just to get a decent IPS screen.
I just wish the RDF Zealots weren't so vocal and boastful. People should be more secure about their high-cost purchase and admit to themselves that they paid over the odds for the brand. Making up silly excuses for Apple or defending their big cash outlay seems to be the norm for many Apply zealots and the distortion of the actual products this creates is mind-boggling. People don't buy $400K Ferraris and then brag about how they're better than a $100K Nissan GTR, even when the GTR has better acceleration/braking/cornering, has two extra seats, a useful trunk, and can traverse a speed hump.
So why do Apple customers feel compelled to say that their expensive, locked-down iDevice is better at stuff when it's (at best) equal?
True RDF - and there's no explanation for why this happens other than RDF-brainwashed peers propagating the RDF like a virus.
MileageMayVary wrote:Doctor Venture wrote:I wonder if AMD might include 16GB HBM2 in a possible Zen2 or Zen3 based APU, and completely eliminate the need for RAM on the motherboard?
I actually think this is a good possibility. Though I wouldn't eliminate RAM entirely from the picture; maybe some models would eliminate it but don't remove it from all systems so that people can expand beyond the HBM capacity.
So maybe a workstation build might look like
L1 32K > L2 1MB > L3 32MB > HBM 16GB > RAM 128GB > SSD Pagefile.
Doctor Venture wrote:You're right about the Apple Zealots. It seems like they're just trying waaay too hard to justify their purchase, and act like they have a personal stake in Apple, not just "Oh, I used their products, and I like them."
just brew it! wrote:Doctor Venture wrote:You're right about the Apple Zealots. It seems like they're just trying waaay too hard to justify their purchase, and act like they have a personal stake in Apple, not just "Oh, I used their products, and I like them."
True Apple zealots do in fact tend to own stock in the company. If you're a True Believer, you put your money where your mouth is. I used to work for someone like that; he was constantly checking Apple's stock price (on his shiny new iPhone, of course).
Chrispy_ wrote:IIRC, one of the big advantages of HBM is the lower power draw than GDDR5, but I'm not sure if it's lower power than DDR4. I know some budget laptops use DDR3 instead of GDDR5 simply because of power consumption, and that within the power budget, using DDR3 frees up some watts and allows higher core clocks on those DDR3 parts than their GDDR5 equivalents.
Doctor Venture wrote:WOW! Seriously? That's some devotion right there. I enjoy a lot of products, but I've never thought of buying stocks in them. Then again, I'd likely lose a ton of money, since I tend to root for the underdog. That's one of my many flaws.
just brew it! wrote:Doctor Venture wrote:WOW! Seriously? That's some devotion right there. I enjoy a lot of products, but I've never thought of buying stocks in them. Then again, I'd likely lose a ton of money, since I tend to root for the underdog. That's one of my many flaws.
If you'd bought AMD stock 2 years ago and sold right before the Ryzen launch, you would've made back your investment 7 times over!
Doctor Venture wrote:just brew it! wrote:Doctor Venture wrote:WOW! Seriously? That's some devotion right there. I enjoy a lot of products, but I've never thought of buying stocks in them. Then again, I'd likely lose a ton of money, since I tend to root for the underdog. That's one of my many flaws.
If you'd bought AMD stock 2 years ago and sold right before the Ryzen launch, you would've made back your investment 7 times over!
I'm not that bright, when it comes to stock market stuff, plus I have the family curse. If I knew latin, I'd make the family motto something along the lines of "If it wasn't for all the bad luck, we wouldn't have any at all". At least it would sound fancy, instead of just sad...
Doctor Venture wrote:If I knew latin, I'd make the family motto something along the lines of "If it wasn't for all the bad luck, we wouldn't have any at all".