is GDDR5X enough?

[bowzef]

(excuse my bad spelling or grammar)

it seems to me that GPU memory speed is becoming more and more important as we continue to grow, it's not just me right? that have notice AMD and Nvidia are making VRAM faster, now i did read some where that games are and will continue to do so will need faster memory as the resolution keeps going higher, as texture's get better ect, do you guy's believe this to be the case?

if we do believe that memory speed is starting become very much important for the future and now, is GDDR5X just not good enough or is it? let's picture this from a perspective of someone that holds on to there GPU's longer then 3years+, now i started to notice more and more that Vram has gone up since days of GTX 500, i also notice that Nvidia has a tendency to gimp on there memory be it speed or Vram amount, not the 1080ti though that's first time Nvidia released something in terms of Vram and thinking slightly in the future.

What i am saying is , is it even worth us investing in buying GPU's that are GDDR5X when next year "maybe" GDDR6 will be out and we have HBM2 ect, i just feel like they selling us this knowing full well that is good "for now" and not for people that hold on there hardware longer then a year, i have always been the type that buy a high end GPU and have it for couple years my HD7970 in crossfire lasted me ages and lot had to do with the fact it had 3GB of Vram.

Now i have a GTX 980 ti 6Gb of vram and i know dam well it was a rip off to buy it, but @#$%ing amd fury was lacking in Vram amount not so much the speed of the HBM, that was great. But i just feel like every-time i buy a Nvidia GPU i have this sense of uneasy feeling that i'm getting ripped off raw, and that they purposely make there GPU's in a such a way where you are force to upgrade to be able maintain settings and Fps and high resolution, most my nvdia experience seem they have a short life span in games, where my AMD experience seems last its test of time far greater, but consider the fact all that is around is a RX480, and i'm rightly pissed at AMD for not competing.

Now we all paying out the butt for gimpvidia crap because no competition, I'm sorry about the rant lot of frustration, because we at a time where 4k res is starting become a thing, and more and more people are up-taking 4k . More and more people trying get that spot of 4k 60fps, but everyone keeps saying oh it be XXXX series from AMD or nvidia that wil do 60fps 4k, hell not even a GTX 1080 ti is able to do 4k 60fps across the board about 75% of the benchmarks is get about 60fps+ but some games it just slip right under it at even at OC.

so i feel rightly annoyed at the fact i feel GDDR5X is not good enough, i also feel that there is a sense of stagnation going on in regards to how these GPU's are made, we can believe these company's are "innocent" and i accept they in the game to make money, but jeez when all i see is frustration when i wanna buy a new GPU because i wanna dam play at 60fps 4k i dam well know deep down buy two GTX 1080ti's or 1080s ain't going be good enough even if i get 60fps "right now" that's the problem it's right now, and have this feeling these cards are not going last as long as i wanted least 3-4years... maybe im over-reacting, who know's? but i think HBM2 should be solution mostly to this issue, i would feel more comfy with that.

 

[RobCrezz]

Its fast enough for gpus right now.

Dont buy a GPU as an investment - GPU tech tends to move the fastest, so just get the best you can afford at the time and be prepared to upgrade more regularly.

The rest of your post... well I dont understand? are you angry at nvidia because they make the fastest cards? Or the game devs for making games look better and able to utilize the fastest cards? Just lower the settings and youll get years out of the card in future games - but the game devs are obviously going to improve graphics and create more load on GPUs when the tech is there.


Are you quite new to PC gaming? Its been like this for as long as 3d accelerators have been around.

 

[bowzef]

Its fast enough for gpus right now.

Dont buy a GPU as an investment - GPU tech tends to move the fastest, so just get the best you can afford at the time and be prepared to upgrade more regularly.

The rest of your post... well I dont understand? are you angry at nvidia because they make the fastest cards? Or the game devs for making games look better and able to utilize the fastest cards? Just lower the settings and youll get years out of the card in future games - but the game devs are obviously going to improve graphics and create more load on GPUs when the tech is there.


Are you quite new to PC gaming? Its been like this for as long as 3d accelerators have been around.

i'm angry at the market and manipulation of "Hype and misleading tendency of Nvidia and i'm mad at AMD for not competing, not mad at game devs no that's for a different time and story, more mad that anyone in the know, knows that 1000 series is not so "great" when you look back from the past since Nv 600 series with all that said if Vulkan or Dx12 or when they become the norm, it may help with some concerns i have in regards to issues i have.

no not new to PC gaming its just back then, performance gains where magnitude larger in %/gains then now , we have to look at the direction we are heading and know that they are purposely withholding advancement in tech to milk industry for every penny and dime. i still remember a time where we could hold on to a GPU longer then a year, i'm sure you remember that too?

 

[RobCrezz]

AMD does want to compete im sure, but its obviously easier said than done - If they had a competitive GPU to take sales from the 1070/1080/1080Ti, dont you think they would have released it?

I think you are looking back with rose tinted specs - the generational gains now are as large if not larger these days than they used to be.

 

[burtman88]

4k resolution reminds me like when 1080p was new to everyone and getting 60 fps was hard without best card or sli. Especially trying to play crysis lol. I dropped 1400 on two 7950 Gx2 Video cards to be able to get 60 fps all the time. Some times it didnt happen, like in crysis optimization was horrible and was amazing. Video cards will catch up soon give it another generation or 2

 

[RobCrezz]

4k resolution reminds me like when 1080p was new to everyone and getting 60 fps was hard without best card or sli. Especially trying to play crysis lol. I dropped 1400 on two 7950 Gx2 Video cards to be able to get 60 fps all the time. Some times it didnt happen, like in crysis optimization was horrible and was amazing. Video cards will catch up soon give it another generation or 2

Yeah exactly, as resolutions are getting higher, its a ton of extra work for the GPUs.

 

[bowzef]

AMD does want to compete im sure, but its obviously easier said than done - If they had a competitive GPU to take sales from the 1070/1080/1080Ti, dont you think they would have released it?

I think you are looking back with rose tinted specs - the generational gains now are as large if not larger these days than they used to be.

i held on to my GTX 9600 in sli until GTX 580 came out
bought GTX 580 waited till AMD released HD7970 because i knew GTX580 vram Gimp was going be a problem in next 2 years, then bought GTX 980 ti, with all that said only cards that last long enough was HD7970s in crossfire and mt old school GTX 9600's , if i recall correctly ever gen was about 40% faster then previous, now we only seeing 20-30%.

GTX 9600 Almost double the performance of the previous Nvidia mid-range card, the GeForce 8600GTS.

 

[RobCrezz]

AMD does want to compete im sure, but its obviously easier said than done - If they had a competitive GPU to take sales from the 1070/1080/1080Ti, dont you think they would have released it?

I think you are looking back with rose tinted specs - the generational gains now are as large if not larger these days than they used to be.

i held on to my GTX 9600 in sli until GTX 580 came out
bought GTX 580 waited till AMD released HD7970 because i knew GTX580 vram Gimp was going be a problem in next 2 years, then bought GTX 980 ti, with all that said only cards that last long enough was HD7970s in crossfire and mt old school GTX 9600's , if i recall correctly ever gen was about 40% faster then previous, now we only seeing 20-30%.

The 980 ti is still a great card though?


Look at the generational improvement from the 960 to 1060:

And from 980ti to 1080ti

Not bad when the new generation cards are so much faster that the x60 series is matching the previous gen x80, and the x70 series is beating the previous x80ti series.

 

[bowzef]

AMD does want to compete im sure, but its obviously easier said than done - If they had a competitive GPU to take sales from the 1070/1080/1080Ti, dont you think they would have released it?

I think you are looking back with rose tinted specs - the generational gains now are as large if not larger these days than they used to be.

i held on to my GTX 9600 in sli until GTX 580 came out
bought GTX 580 waited till AMD released HD7970 because i knew GTX580 vram Gimp was going be a problem in next 2 years, then bought GTX 980 ti, with all that said only cards that last long enough was HD7970s in crossfire and mt old school GTX 9600's , if i recall correctly ever gen was about 40% faster then previous, now we only seeing 20-30%.

The 980 ti is still a great card though?


Look at the generational improvement from the 960 to 1060:

And from 980ti to 1080ti

Not bad when the new generation cards are so much faster that the x60 series is matching the previous gen x80, and the x70 series is beating the previous x80ti series.

i guess i have higher expectations due to i believe Nvidia is more then capable to release even more performance from 1000 series then they did, i'm sure they thought about using HBM to increased the gap by extra 15% then what we currently getting with 1000 series, if nvidia released a GTX 1070/80/80ti with HBM i would not be salty buthurt person >.>

 

[sizzling]

I don't see how this is any different to any other product. We know better CPU's are being developed, I know a car I buy today will have a better spec next year for the same price. We live in such a competitive and cut throat world the only way companies can survive is constantly releasing products, that's just life.

 

[bowzef]

I don't see how this is any different to any other product. We know better CPU's are being developed, I know a car I buy today will have a better spec next year for the same price. We live in such a competitive and cut throat world the only way companies can survive is constantly releasing products, that's just life.

i'm not against releasing new products i'm against purposely gimping products when they don't have to, everyone could agree would been better use GDDR5X on mid range cards and use HBM on higher end 1000 series, and it has nothing do with production, we already over paying for these GPU's so i expect the tech for the price, back in 8000 and 9000 GTX times they where on bleeding edge of tech now they are choosing to stagnate it.

 

[RobCrezz]

I don't see how this is any different to any other product. We know better CPU's are being developed, I know a car I buy today will have a better spec next year for the same price. We live in such a competitive and cut throat world the only way companies can survive is constantly releasing products, that's just life.

i'm not against releasing new products i'm against purposely gimping products when they don't have to, everyone could agree would been better use GDDR5X on mid range cards and use HBM on higher end 1000 series, and it has nothing do with production, we already over paying for these GPU's so i expect the tech for the price, back in 8000 and 9000 GTX times they where on bleeding edge of tech now they are choosing to stagnate it.

Do you have any evidence to suggest they are gimping it? Doesnt appear like the 1080 ti would be much faster if it had HBM?

If they thought memory bandwidth would really be an issue then they would have just made it with a wider memory bus - this is what they always did in the past. But theres no point making the bus larger than it needs to be otherwise you are just wasting power.

 

[bowzef]

I don't see how this is any different to any other product. We know better CPU's are being developed, I know a car I buy today will have a better spec next year for the same price. We live in such a competitive and cut throat world the only way companies can survive is constantly releasing products, that's just life.

i'm not against releasing new products i'm against purposely gimping products when they don't have to, everyone could agree would been better use GDDR5X on mid range cards and use HBM on higher end 1000 series, and it has nothing do with production, we already over paying for these GPU's so i expect the tech for the price, back in 8000 and 9000 GTX times they where on bleeding edge of tech now they are choosing to stagnate it.

Do you have any evidence to suggest they are gimping it? Doesnt appear like the 1080 ti would be much faster if it had HBM?

If they thought memory bandwidth would really be an issue then they would have just made it with a wider memory bus - this is what they always did in the past. But theres no point making the bus larger than it needs to be otherwise you are just wasting power.

prove it? you aware 4k is a thing right? you aware very soon higher res textures and lighting are going be a thing? very soon? its simple HBM is faster then GDDR5X you are telling me HBM would not give more performance to a GPU over GDDR5X? come on man we both know HBM would see better performance, there is more then just better FPS is also way more efficient at it too not by just power consumption by also throughput and getting data in and out of the Video memory, and that's really the important factor, more so at 4k then 1080p, reduce stuttering reduce pop in smother experience overall when and some games do have 4k textures ect, i played a highly modded version of Fallout 4 at 4k with 4k textures and many other graphical enhancement excluding that GPU was craping it self in frames, it was also running into issues in regards to maintaining the textures, in some situations wouldn't even load textures and il get a white texture until the memory catched up . and reason i did that was to show case what future holds and this future is now, may not seem like it, but next 1year or 2 we going see more and more games with some insane textures and lighting, so if GDDR5 can't even handle 4k textures in mass, i would expect GDDR5X to do the job right? no, not really its like giving you 90% of what you need to be able maintain it effectively and it doesn't take into consideration of other effects that will also scale in resolution of those such as particle shadows and better lighting and they all have textures as well and they also will be getting better in a very short time, and GDDR5X will not be able deal and manage this unlike HBM.

Nvidia had a choice GDDR5X or HBM, they choose GDDR5X but regardless of next generation produces more frames there more then just pure FPS we talking here far more to it, HBM solves many issues that are about to hit us in a very short distance as i said about a year or so we these GTX 1080s wont be able to effectively play games at 4k even with 2 lets say you had 2 1080ti's in sli, should be dominating all the games, yes you will until next year when there be a huge shift in textures and lighting and effects. this could been solved with HBM as i said not the FPS its other bits that are important.

 

[RobCrezz]

I don't see how this is any different to any other product. We know better CPU's are being developed, I know a car I buy today will have a better spec next year for the same price. We live in such a competitive and cut throat world the only way companies can survive is constantly releasing products, that's just life.

i'm not against releasing new products i'm against purposely gimping products when they don't have to, everyone could agree would been better use GDDR5X on mid range cards and use HBM on higher end 1000 series, and it has nothing do with production, we already over paying for these GPU's so i expect the tech for the price, back in 8000 and 9000 GTX times they where on bleeding edge of tech now they are choosing to stagnate it.

Do you have any evidence to suggest they are gimping it? Doesnt appear like the 1080 ti would be much faster if it had HBM?

If they thought memory bandwidth would really be an issue then they would have just made it with a wider memory bus - this is what they always did in the past. But theres no point making the bus larger than it needs to be otherwise you are just wasting power.

prove it? you aware 4k is a thing right? you aware very soon higher res textures and lighting are going be a thing? very soon? its simple HBM is faster then GDDR5X you are telling me HBM would not give more performance to a GPU over GDDR5X? come on man we both know HBM would see better performance, there is more then just better FPS is also way more efficient at it too not by just power consumption by also throughput and getting data in and out of the Video memory, and that's really the important factor, more so at 4k then 1080p, reduce stuttering reduce pop in smother experience overall when and some games do have 4k textures ect, i played a highly modded version of Fallout 4 at 4k with 4k textures and many other graphical enhancement excluding that GPU was craping it self in frames, it was also running into issues in regards to maintaining the textures, in some situations wouldn't even load textures and il get a white texture until the memory catched up . and reason i did that was to show case what future holds and this future is now, may not seem like it, but next 1year or 2 we going see more and more games with some insane textures and lighting, so if GDDR5 can't even handle 4k textures in mass, i would expect GDDR5X to do the job right? no, not really its like giving you 90% of what you need to be able maintain it effectively and it doesn't take into consideration of other effects that will also scale in resolution of those such as particle shadows and better lighting and they all have textures as well and they also will be getting better in a very short time, and GDDR5X will not be able deal and manage this unlike HBM.

More memory bandwidth is only good if the GPU has the power to utilize it - If the 1080 ti has enough memory performance with GDDR5X, then theres nothing to suggest that HBM would provide a significant performance improvement.

I have no doubt Nvidia will create a GPU that will require the speed of HBM/HBM2, but I dont believe the 1080ti is "gimped" by not having it.

You do know that the technology used doesnt matter right? memory bandwidth is memory bandwidth. If nvidia needed more bandwidth on the 1080 ti but couldnt use HBM/HBM2, they would have designed it with a larger bus to go with GDDR5X.

 

[bowzef]

I don't see how this is any different to any other product. We know better CPU's are being developed, I know a car I buy today will have a better spec next year for the same price. We live in such a competitive and cut throat world the only way companies can survive is constantly releasing products, that's just life.

i'm not against releasing new products i'm against purposely gimping products when they don't have to, everyone could agree would been better use GDDR5X on mid range cards and use HBM on higher end 1000 series, and it has nothing do with production, we already over paying for these GPU's so i expect the tech for the price, back in 8000 and 9000 GTX times they where on bleeding edge of tech now they are choosing to stagnate it.

Do you have any evidence to suggest they are gimping it? Doesnt appear like the 1080 ti would be much faster if it had HBM?

If they thought memory bandwidth would really be an issue then they would have just made it with a wider memory bus - this is what they always did in the past. But theres no point making the bus larger than it needs to be otherwise you are just wasting power.

prove it? you aware 4k is a thing right? you aware very soon higher res textures and lighting are going be a thing? very soon? its simple HBM is faster then GDDR5X you are telling me HBM would not give more performance to a GPU over GDDR5X? come on man we both know HBM would see better performance, there is more then just better FPS is also way more efficient at it too not by just power consumption by also throughput and getting data in and out of the Video memory, and that's really the important factor, more so at 4k then 1080p, reduce stuttering reduce pop in smother experience overall when and some games do have 4k textures ect, i played a highly modded version of Fallout 4 at 4k with 4k textures and many other graphical enhancement excluding that GPU was craping it self in frames, it was also running into issues in regards to maintaining the textures, in some situations wouldn't even load textures and il get a white texture until the memory catched up . and reason i did that was to show case what future holds and this future is now, may not seem like it, but next 1year or 2 we going see more and more games with some insane textures and lighting, so if GDDR5 can't even handle 4k textures in mass, i would expect GDDR5X to do the job right? no, not really its like giving you 90% of what you need to be able maintain it effectively and it doesn't take into consideration of other effects that will also scale in resolution of those such as particle shadows and better lighting and they all have textures as well and they also will be getting better in a very short time, and GDDR5X will not be able deal and manage this unlike HBM.

More memory bandwidth is only good if the GPU has the power to utilize it - If the 1080 ti has enough memory performance with GDDR5X, then theres nothing to suggest that HBM would provide a significant performance improvement.

I have no doubt Nvidia will create a GPU that will require the speed of HBM/HBM2, but I dont believe the 1080ti is "gimped" by not having it.

You do know that the technology used doesnt matter right? memory bandwidth is memory bandwidth. If nvidia needed more bandwidth on the 1080 ti but couldnt use HBM/HBM2, they would have designed it with a larger bus to go with GDDR5X.

all the current GPU's can utilise better memory, otherwise would not see performance increased and better frametimes when you overclock the memory, i overclocked the memory on my GTX 980 ti and the textures that didn't load started load little better and little more effectively, because amount of it was trying get in and out, memory on video cards and the speed can be utilised more then you think, GDDR5X can utilise today textures and some 4k textures but when everything is 4k textured and all other effects are higher resolutions that's when it plonk out, i have also tested this on my dads Fury X modded version of fallout it ran into other issues VRAM limitations, but didn't have any issues with the textures unlike my 980 ti did, with that said it tanked due to VRAM limitations not due to bandwidth of the GPU, if the GPU had 8gb of HBM would of not hit the wall as badly regardless of the FPS, other factors then FPS that is important and with that said this is DX11 with Dx12/Vulkan that is when HBM is needed far more as well, many factors besides what fps you getting because you could have GPU that could do 60fps and still suffer from these fundamental problems, getting data in and out is not frames or utilisation of the architecture its the abilliity to get the textures lighing and other effects in the VRAM and out of the VRAM as quick as possible as a higher resolution of the texture and effects as well as the screen resolution, to grab the data and use it fast enough to display on screen with out errors or stuttering.

Example is you can get, 60 FPS in a game not hit ya Vram limit in terms of data held such as the amount of vram ect but the speed that memory can throughput in and out is of GDDR5 as a example wouldn't be able to do it so you have issues in regards to how textures are display from stuttering textures not loading at all or hugely delay such as massive pop in effect to bad draw distances and worst case driver crash.
and this can determined a player-able 60fps or even say 30fps to a unplayable 60fps/30fps.

 

[RobCrezz]

Sure you get some performance improvement by speeding up the ram, but only so much, eventually its just not a limitation.

But like I said, they could have just increased the size of memory bus.

 

[bowzef]

Sure you get some performance improvement by speeding up the ram, but only so much, eventually its just not a limitation.

But like I said, they could have just increased the size of memory bus.

memory bus is important yes, but so is transferring 1+ terabyte a sec
256-bit Memory Interface Width GTX 1080
Memory Bandwidth (GB/sec) 320 GTX 1080

good for DX11 and sub 4k textures and all the above things i have talked about

HBM1
Memory Interface 4096bit
Memory Bandwidth 512GB/s

bad because 4gb limitation but good everywhere else.
and this is conservative for HBM can do 1024GB/s

 

[RobCrezz]

Yeah but my point is, they could have used a 512bit or higher memory bus with DDR5X if they really thought the GP102 needed more memory bandwidth.

Clearly HBM2 was either not ready, too expensive or just not required to get the performance.

 

[bowzef]

Yeah but my point is, they could have used a 512bit or higher memory bus with DDR5X if they really thought the GP102 needed more memory bandwidth.

Clearly HBM2 was either not ready, too expensive or just not required to get the performance.

more expensive, GDDR5X is cheap lol, man a GTX 1080 or Ti with HBM2 would be nice, considering the fact price of the GPU's ect, feel like with how much they been asking they should come with HBM2 , in my opinion and this hole founders edition fee ect all just makes seem even more so...

 

[RobCrezz]

Why do you care what memory technology they use? As long as it gets the performance/powerusage, the way its done is not relevant to me.

Sure the 1080 ti doesnt use HBM, but it gets the performance, its faster than any competition by a long way - Nvidia could have just not released it, continued to sell the regular 1080 and Titan X(p) for top price and still had the fastest gpu on the market.