• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

AMD might have trouble sourcing HBM2 for its next-gen video cards

Gregster

Gregster

Gregster

Caporegime
Joined
24 Sep 2008
Posts
38,284
Location
Essex innit!
AMD rumored to have trouble sourcing the HBM2 numbers it wants in 2016, might lose even more customers to NVIDIA (NYSE:AMD, NASDAQ:NVDA)


Exclusive: AMD has enjoyed being the first to market with a HBM-powered video card, with the Radeon R9 Nano, R9 Fury and R9 Fury X all powered by High Bandwidth Memory. But it looks like the company might run into troubles sourcing HBM2 in 2016 according to our industry sources. Our source reached out to us tody, saying that they "wouldn't count on [AMD] using HBM2 next year", but wouldn't elaborate further. This is an interesting rumor, because if it were true, it would mean that the use of HBM2 would shift primarily to NVIDIA. NVIDIA's next-gen Pascal architecture is already being tested internally by the company according to the latest rumors, and will rock HBM2. But AMD's next-gen GPU is rumored to rock between 8GB and 16GB of HBM2, is something we don't know too much about yet. If AMD is in trouble with HBM2 next year, they might be stuck with short end of HBM2 yields. If so, we could see AMD utilizing HBM2 for their highest end GPU, which will most likely be a Fury X successor. Under that, we could see the company possibly using HBM1, but personally, I think HBM1 is something that should be used on mid-range cards for AMD's next-generation product stack. During our recent testing, with an article coming soon, the 4GB of HBM1 on the Fury X is simply not enough for 4K and beyond gaming. We tested 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-way Fury X cards in QuadFire with triple 4K monitors in Eyefinity at 11,520 x 2160. Beyond 2 GPUs, the 3- and 4-way setups fell to their knees because the 4GB of framebuffer is too quickly filled at 11,520 x 2160. AMD simply needs 8GB or more of HBM2 on its next-gen GPU products if it wants to truly push the 4K gaming side of things, and that's without going into future VR headsets.

Read more: http://www.tweaktown.com/news/47773/amd-trouble-sourcing-hbm2-next-gen-video-cards/index.html
Click to expand...

Very very interesting if true and after being the first to market with HBM 1.0, I thought they would already have HBM 2.0 nailed.
 
Lol,so they co-developed the standard and all of a sudden dome clickbait article says they won't get any HBM2 but all their competitors will....

Right.....

Next,Apple gets all the HMC allocations next year too leaving Intel with zero HMC for its MIC cards next year even though they developed it...
 
Not too long ago we had articles saying they had the priority claim to HBM2. Basically it sounds like a slow week for someone so they needed to get there click quota up.
 
During our recent testing, with an article coming soon, the 4GB of HBM1 on the Fury X is simply not enough for 4K and beyond gaming.
Click to expand...

"And beyond" is the accurate part.

But it's interesting.. Why are AMD struggling to source it if nVidia aren't? I thought it all came from the same few places (samsung and hynix?)
 
Perhaps it's a case of nVidia throwing more money and larger orders at the problem, in a similar way to Apple/Qualcomm throwing money at TSMC/Samsung and causing 16/14nm to be mobile centric and GPUs to be stuck on 28nm for ages.

AMD may have "co-developed" HBM, but it's an open standard and they can't make it without a fab, and if the people making it want to sell it to nVidia, not much they can do.
 
Howling said:
"And beyond" is the accurate part.

But it's interesting.. Why are AMD struggling to source it if nVidia aren't? I thought it all came from the same few places (samsung and hynix?)
Click to expand...

Who would you prioritize ? a company with 82% of the market or someone with 18% ?
 
Still think it's a load of nonsense,ATI/AMD with less sales and money still secured GDDR4 and GDDR5 for yonks before Nvidia.

Nvidia were still massively outselling them then too.

First it was they would get all the HBM2 and two months later they get zero.

Next month I expect it will be Nvidia will have ditched HBM2 and used HMC again...

I would worry more about 14/16nm yields first.
 
What a surprise a site claims they have priority on it then later claims that may not be the case, so essentially they're doing 50\50 BS articles so they can point to whatever one is closest to the truth later down the line. zzzZZZZZzzzzz

Their "source"? Presumably the same guy who typed the article after reaching up into his asss for some crap to post as "news".
 
Last edited:
With the state AMD are in businesses are probably going to give priority to more financially secure customers and I wouldn't be surprised if they wanted paying up front by AMD in any future dealings, lets face it AMD are walking a bit of a tightrope.

Plus like LambChop says NVidia would be the much bigger customer in terms of overall orders, HBM makers won't gamble on AMD turning things around they'll just go where the most money is to be made. Given how few Fury's have made it onto shelves it doesn't even seem like AMD have purchased much HBM.
 
Last edited:
I would be very surprised if this is true but makes you wonder where the article got its information from. It isn't something you would just come out with surely?
 
A troll article which also claims 4GB is not enough for triple 4K monitors. Any sane person would already know that. Hilarious.

If HBM2 is in limited supply then also expect Nvidia to have problems getting it but conveniently the article ignores that and claims Nvidia will actually be the only one with HBM2. No doubt their source is some twitter post from some unknown troll account.

Greg you're sooooo NEUTRAL. I have yet to see any positive AMD article from you though.
 
Last edited:
fs123 said:
Greg you're sooooo NEUTRAL. I have yet to see any positive AMD article from you though.
Click to expand...

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18692141

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18691403

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18691061

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18686902

Just a couple of recent threads I have posted that are very pro AMD. I post news regardless of vendor bias and if it is worth a discussion. Your problem is your own bias blocks out what is what and you only see the negativity threads and jump on that. I even said I doubt this is true but still felt it worthy of discussion and someone might have some evidence to say this is the case or isn't.

Maybe try and look at what is what in future before accusing people of this and that. :)
 
fs123 said:
Greg you're sooooo NEUTRAL. I have yet to see any positive AMD article from you though.
Click to expand...

It's a much tougher job to find any positive news about AMD lately. It's not like they're flushed with success is it. Their entire existence is hanging on their 2016 line up. Not a good place to be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom