A render?
To be fair the Shintai, I believe that the console manufacturers would have been wiser to use better tech. Even if he was wrong, his sentiment was correct. As it stands, I believe the lack of power in these machines is helping pc gaming grow. So, I suppose there is always a bright side. I really don't see how they can possibly hope to drag these machines out for 10 years. Then again, they just might....
To be fair the Shintai, I believe that the console manufacturers would have been wiser to use better tech. Even if he was wrong, his sentiment was correct. As it stands, I believe the lack of power in these machines is helping pc gaming grow. So, I suppose there is always a bright side. I really don't see how they can possibly hope to drag these machines out for 10 years. Then again, they just might....
Yes, because NVidia have never shown a non-functional mockup on stage before
Saying that they are or aren't using HBM based on that photo is just funny. There may well be an interposer on the final design, because that little thing was just a design concept. It was meant to convey a) the possibilities for new form factors and b) it will have some sort of stacked memory. Don't read any more into it than that.
And come on, SK Hynix had a booth at GTC showing off HBM2. Didn't see anything about HMC.
Anyone who thinks this isn't a mock up and is real GPU/Memory/interposer/etc... I have a bridge you might be interested in.
That could very well be a development board. There is a lot of room between "final product" and "concept". I've worked on some hardware prototypes before, years before their release when things were still in the development phase. (not GPUs mind you.)
I thought Pascal was supposed to be 3D and the mock up is 2.5D. Or am I mistaken?
>100W chips won't be true 3d for a while, if ever. Putting extra chips on top of your die makes cooling problematic.
Thanks. So, is it 2.5D like Fiji? Or is there something different?
"2.5D". It's the same tech as Fiji, just second generation for higher capacity.
So why Is Jen-Hsun standing in front of a giant marketing PPS presentation that says 3D while holding up this 2.5D markup?
If it is in reality 2.5D why is nobody questioning the ethics of this?
What he is promoting is that next year nVidia will have what AMD is releasing next week.
It's mostly semantics. The memory modules are stacked in "3d" (hence 3d memory), but the overall chip is more of a multi-module design combining a traditional 2d gpu with 3d stacked memory. Calling it a 2.5d design is just a more succinct way of describing it.
How is it semantics? It's not 3D. Is this the engineering dept. not communicating again?
Better marketing once again. While amd is marketing 2.5D memory, nvidia is marketing 3D memory, while both are right, customers think, 3D >>> 2.5D => nvdia >> amd => take my money nvidia.
wont matter, AMD has the fastest card in the world.
Fury x is what you will buy as you know its the best.
semantics wont matter.
So why Is Jen-Hsun standing in front of a giant marketing PPS presentation that says 3D while holding up this 2.5D markup?
The specific issue here is that HBM needs to be attached on silicon to work. The next-gen nvidia GPU in question has been confirmed to use HBM, and the memory chips on that board are neither attached directly to the die, nor sitting on a silicon interposer. This means they cannot function -- ie, that is not a real, working gpu, but probably a bunch of components hot glued to a board to look like the layout of the real thing.
Not that there is anything wrong with mockups. The "woodscrew controversy" was asisine, all these pr stunts before actual release are pure marketing anyway, there's not actually any reason for them to bother shipping up real hardware to some event when a mockup will do just as well.