Am 03.06.2015 um 08:32 schrieb Raffaele Fragapane:
Huh?
The width is whatever is required for the controllers to address the RAM.
If they have 12GB over 6 32bit controllers as that manufacturing specs
max why would they have more than 384?
I was hoping for nVidia to bring the bus width up to 512bit, making
2,4,8,16,32,64 GB Ram likely because that
would go well together with such a bus width (or even just a 256bit
width bus).
Of course, if all you have is 384bit, 12 GB is what is convenient to
connect, not 16GB (as in AMD´s current 512bit bus cards)
My point.
Looking at previous release/development cycles of nVidia, one could now
expect to see a Titan Z Black edition coming
to close off the 9xx series, with some sort of shrunk production
process, more cores or a little bit of higher clocking
but unlikely to have a wider bus to adress video RAM in the 16GB range.
Such a thing will probably not come before the next generation of cards,
in pseudo naming, the 10xx series.
Not before next year.
This gives AMD 1 year to try and get customers looking for lot´s of
video ram for their editing, comp, etc.
tim
Also, what the architecture and the proposed manufacturing guidelines
allow in terms of addressing width isn't the same as what's out in the
current card of the month.
The 980 is the same in most regards but only has 256bit in example
because al it needs to address is 8GB.
If they need to address more It's very likely the width can be pushed
a good deal further.
The bottleneck isn't currently measured in bus width, the throughput
is an issue, and it's got little to do with the width of addressing
stacks, and it's why things like NVLink and new PCI bus specs and so
on are being looked into.
There are a lot other design issues that are being worked on by more
than just a company, the addressing width across the bus isn't
particularly symptomatic of any of those AFAIK.
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Tim Leydecker <bauero...@gmx.de
<mailto:bauero...@gmx.de>> wrote:
The 980ti (starting at EUR 735,-) is a good opportunity compared
to the gtx980 (starting at EUR 500,-)
but it is annoying to know that Video-RAM will soon become a
bottleneck because more and more
applications start to utilize GPU performance to their benefit,
either when caching out like in Nuke for
huge environment images or a GPU renderer like Redshift3D having
to optimize, e.g. limit it´s
cache sizes to fit into a smaller than desireable meomory footprint.
All that on top of what a 4k display would demand for it´s share
of available video memory to start with.
I think Nvidia missed an opportunity there, not just for quadro cards.
They are pulling an Intel in terms of price tags but they didn´t
make sure their base is safe for the future.
I had hoped for a wider than 384bit bus, e.g. something more like
a 512bit bandwidth which would
have made power of two steps in video ram more likely, e.g. cards
with 4GB, 8GB, 12GB, 16GB, etc.
To me, it seems the gtx9xx bus width comes directly from the
gtx7xx range, which was already starting
to show limits in buswidth back then.
All that said and taking tax laws and such for wrting off hardware
into account, I´d probably have to go
with a Titan, using it 2-3 years and finding myself wanting more
video ram soon anyway...
Cheers,
tim
