• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD's RX Vega to Feature 4 GB and 8 GB Memory

Joined
Jul 9, 2015
Messages
3,413 (1.00/day)
System Name M3401 notebook
Processor 5600H
Motherboard NA
Memory 16GB
Video Card(s) 3050
Storage 500GB SSD
Display(s) 14" OLED screen of the laptop
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores 3050 scores good 15-20% lower than average, despite ASUS's claims that it has uber cooling.
Last (the only?) time we saw Vega. Note that just beating 1080 (314mm^2) is laughable for nearly 500mm^2 chip, it would be Sony level epic.fail, the thing must take on 1080Ti at least:


Some games don't use >4 GiB of VRAM but some do and with every passing year, the latter group gets bigger.

So we know equipping cards with HBM is expensive, mkay, so that's why AMD even bothered with the whole "high bandwidth cache" thing.
At least in theory it sounds quite feasible: "dear developer, we know you don't need all that mem at once, just allocate whatever you need, we'll handle moving things into GPU mem ourselves, oh, and by the way, we don't call it VRAM, we call it high bandwidth cache now".

The basic idea here is that, especially in the professional space, data set size is vastly larger than local storage. So there needs to be a sensible system in place to move that data across various tiers of storage. This may sound like a simple concept, but in fact GPUs do a pretty bad job altogether of handling situations in which a memory request has to go off-package. AMD wants to do a better job here, both in deciding what data needs to actually be on-package, but also in breaking up those requests so that “data management” isn’t just moving around a few very large chunks of data. The latter makes for an especially interesting point, as it could potentially lead to a far more CPU-like process for managing memory, with a focus on pages instead of datasets.






http://www.anandtech.com/show/11002/the-amd-vega-gpu-architecture-teaser/3

 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
1,002 (0.21/day)
Processor Intel core i9 13900ks sp117 direct die
Motherboard Asus Maximus Apex Z790
Cooling Custom loop 3*360 45mm thick+ 3 x mo-ra3 420 +Dual D5 pump and dual ddc pump
Memory 2x24gb Gskill 8800c38
Video Card(s) Asus RTX 4090 Strix
Storage 2 tb crucial t700, raid 0 samsung 970 pro 2tb
Display(s) Sammsung G7 32”
Case Dynamic XL
Audio Device(s) Creative Omni 5.1 usb sound card
Power Supply Corsair AX1600i
Mouse Model O-
Keyboard Hyper X Alloy Origin Core
Why AMD never launch a faster card before NVIDIA? They always do it several months to a year after NVIDIA. That makes me never want to buy AMD. Why don't they launch VEGA 3 months from now and it will be faster than VOLTA which will be launched 6-12 months after that?
 
Joined
Dec 22, 2011
Messages
3,890 (0.82/day)
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 3700X
Motherboard MSI MAG B550 TOMAHAWK
Cooling AMD Wraith Prism
Memory Team Group Dark Pro 8Pack Edition 3600Mhz CL16
Video Card(s) NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 FE
Storage Kingston A2000 1TB + Seagate HDD workhorse
Display(s) Samsung 50" QN94A Neo QLED
Case Antec 1200
Power Supply Seasonic Focus GX-850
Mouse Razer Deathadder Chroma
Keyboard Logitech UltraX
Software Windows 11
Last (the only?) time we saw Vega. Note that just beating 1080 (314mm^2) is laughable for nearly 500mm^2 chip, it would be Sony level epic.fail, the thing must take on 1080Ti at least:


Damn, the GTX 1070 is fast... and efficient!
 
Top