HBM2e? Does that make sense for this kind of product, though? Not just for the price, but also because IIRC there were problems implementing it a couple years ago (uneven height complicating cooling is what comes to mind right now, but I can't really remember for sure)
Given that AMD used more expensive HBM2 on the Vega cards, even accounting for higher capacity, HBM2e shouldn't be out of reach for these, and would provide all the bandwidth you could possibly want even with relatively low-end chips (they don't need the top-end 3.2Gbps/pin version, 2.5 or 2.7 would still make 2 stacks faster than a 512-bit GDDR6 bus). Of course this is pure speculation, and given the price of HBM (even 2e) and interposer packaging, GDDR6 is more likely for anything below $1000. But one can dream, no? It just depends how much AMD wants to increase their margins compared to previous high end cards. Of course, the VII had 16GB of HBM2 at $699, so that's something, but that was a cut-down workstation chip and can't really be counted ...
As for the issues, there were some issues with uneven package height with Vega 56/64, but given those experiences they should really have that straightened out by now. Besides, well-made coolers still performed well on those GPUs, though sufficient mounting pressure was a necessity.
Well, it is likely, didn't AMD release a statement earlier that 8GB VRAM should be the bare minimum.
If you are thinking of what I think you are thinking of, they were just advertising that their low end cards come in 8GB options compared to Nvidia's 4GB or 6GB options.
