Vik


Micron Discusses GDDR: 16 Gbps GDDR5X, 16 nm GDDR6 and GDDR5

Micron Discusses GDDR: 16 Gbps GDDR5X, 16 nm GDDR6 and GDDR5

Micron has made a number of announcements in recent weeks regarding its GDDR memory for graphics cards, game consoles and networking applications. The company is reporting that they’ve been able to hit 16 Gbps data rates in the lab on their latest generation of GDDR5X devices, while also reiterating their long-term plans for GDDR6 and GDDR5, with GDDR6 memory due in a couple of quarters from now, while GDDR5 will be here to stay for a long time to come.

Graphics DRAM has been a hot topic in the industry in the recent years as GPU demands for memory bandwidth are growing rapidly and because different companies offer different types of memory to satisfy these increasing requirements. For example, SK Hynix and Samsung rolled out HBM (Gen 1 and Gen 2) memory in 2015 and 2016 for ultra-high-end consumer and HPC applications, whereas Micron introduced its GDDR5X for high-end graphics cards last year. At present, HBM offers the greatest potential bandwidth, however the complexity of the multi-layer chips and 2.5D packaging keep costs high, so it remains to be seen which mass consumer applications adopt it. Meanwhile, conventional graphics memory in BGA packaging and proven architecture continues to evolve and hit new performance targets due to architectural improvements, which are intended to keep it competitive in the coming years.

When Micron announced its GDDR5X memory in late 2015, it set two targets for data transfer rates: the initial target of 10 – 12 Gbps and the longer-term target of 16 Gbps. Initially, the company only supplied GDDR5X ICs validated at 10 and 11 Gbps, but this year the company also started to bin the chips for 12 Gbps. The latter are used on NVIDIA’s Titan Xp graphics card. What is noteworthy is that engineers from Micron’s development center in Munich (also known as Graphics DRAM Design Center) recently managed to run the company’s mass-produced GDDR5X chips at 16 Gbps in the lab.

While the achievement doesn’t have an impact on actual products available today, it has a number of important implications. Primarily, it means that Micron has refined their process to the point where they can build graphics DRAM with 16 Gbps signaling, and this is something it is going to need going forward. But additionally, it shows that the current GDDR5X technology has potential, and that Micron’s customers might release new products with faster memory.

Micron has been quite busy in the last couple of years working on the GDDR5X memory specification, physical implementation of such ICs, and then developing GDDR6 chips that the company plans to launch by early 2018. In fact, GDDR5X and the GDDR6 are not that different. They are both based on the 16n prefetch architecture and this is the key to their additional performance when compared to GDDR5. Meanwhile, GDDR6 also features dual-channel mode, which is meant to ensure better channel utilization and hence improve performance in cases that can take advantage of the feature.

Micron’s GDDR Memory at Glance
  GDDR5 GDDR5X GDDR6
Capacity 4 Gb – 8 Gb 8 Gb 8 Gb
Data Rate 5 – 8 Gbps 10 – 12 Gbps Over 12 Gbps
Process Technology 20+ nm
20 nm, 16 nm
20 nm 16 nm

Meanwhile Micron will be using 16 nm fab lines to produce GDDR6 memory devices, which may add frequency potential to the upcoming chips compared to ICs made using their 20 nm fabrication process. Speaking of 16 nm, Micron also plans to use it for newer GDDR5 chips, which makes a lot of sense considering the fact that such devices are going to be used for graphics cards and game consoles for years to come.

Summing up. Micron has GDDR5X memory chips that run at 16 Gbps in the lab using test equipment. Such chips are made using 20 nm process technology. Meanwhile Micron is using 16 nm fabrication process to produce GDDR6 and GDDR5 by 2018.

Related Reading:

AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition Retail Listings Appear: Cards at $1199 and $1799

AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition Retail Listings Appear: Cards at $1199 and $1799

Eagerly anticipated for later this month is the launch of AMD’s first wave of Radeon Vega cards, the first-run workstation/early adopter-focused Radeon Vega Frontier Edition. To date, AMD has not yet said anything further about the launch since last month’s Computex unveil, however it appears that either AMD is opting to quietly release the sure to sell out cards, or some of their retailers have jumped the gun, as listings for both models have begun to show up.

SabrePC, one of the industry’s more specialized retailers whom tends to focus on workstation and server products, has posted listings for both of the Radeon Vega Frontier Edition cards that AMD has previously unveiled. That is, both the air-cooled card and the closed loop liquid cooled model. As you’d expect for these early-run cards, they won’t come cheap: the air cooled model is listed at $1199, while the liquid cooled card is higher still at $1799.

As a matter of editorial policy I don’t typically post news about retailer listings; these are often erroneous, or at the very least speculative. However any listings at SabrePC raise an eyebrow as they’re a more straight-laced player and one of the traditional retailers for workstation products. So they’re not known to post faulty listings. Which, coupled with the fact that other workstation retailers are also listing these cards, leads me to believe that this week’s listing isn’t an accident, even if AMD themselves aren’t saying more about the product.

In any case, we had no real guidance for where AMD would price these cards at prior to today, so I’m admittedly a bit surprised to see the Frontier Edition cards come in as (relatively) cheap as they have. $1199 for the air cooled card is less than similar NVIDIA Quadros (and Radeon Pro cards, for that matter), and is perfectly aligned with NVIDIA Titan Xp pricing. Meanwhile the liquid cooled card is a bit more surprising with its $600 premium. All messaging so far from AMD is that these are a low volume part meant for customers to evaluate Vega as early as possible, so it’ll be interesting to see where AMD goes from here.

AMD Workstation Card Specification Comparison
  Radeon Vega Frontier Edition
(Unconfirmed)
Radeon Pro Duo (Polaris) Radeon Pro WX 7100 Radeon Fury X
Stream Processors 4096 2 x 2304 2304 4096
Texture Units ? 2 x 144 144 256
ROPs 64? 2 x 32 32 64
Boost Clock 1.6GHz 1243MHz 1243MHz 1050MHz
Single Precision 13.1 TFLOPS 11.5 TFLOPS 5.7 TFLOPS 8.6 TFLOPS
Half Precision 26.2 TFLOPS 11.5 TFLOPS 5.7 TFLOPS 8.6 TFLOPS
Memory Clock 1.89Gbps HBM2 7Gbps GDDR5 7Gbps GDDR5 1Gbps HBM
Memory Bus Width 2048-bit 2 x 256-bit 256-bit 4096-bit
Memory Bandwidth 483GB/sec 2x 224GB/sec 224GB/sec 512GB/sec
VRAM 16GB 2 x 16GB 8GB 4GB
Typical Board Power ? 250W 130W 275W
GPU Vega (1) Polaris 10 Polaris 10 Fiji
Architecture Vega Polaris Polaris GCN 1.2
Manufacturing Process GloFo 14nm GloFo 14nm GloFo 14nm TSMC 28nm
Launch Date 06/2017 05/2017 10/2016 06/24/15
Launch Price Air: $1199
Liquid: $1799
$999 $649 $649

Meanwhile SabrePC also lists technical specifications for the Frontier Edition cards, with both cards listed at the same memory bandwidth and peak throughput. At 13.1 TFLOPS FP32, this would put the GPU clockspeed at 1.6GHz on the dot, just a smidge higher than AMD’s own presentations last month. Meanwhile 483GB/sec of memory bandwidth puts the memory clock at just under 1.9Gbps. That both cards are listed with the same specifications is a bit surprising, and given the price difference I’m not wholly convinced that Sabre has the right specifications for the cheaper air cooled card – distinctly cheaper cards are usually built around harvested processors – but for now it’s what we have to work with. It may very well be that the listings are correct, but the air cooled card is expected to throttle more often relative to the high-efficiency air cooler.

In the meantime I’ve reached out to AMD for more information on these new listings, particularly since AMD’s official Frontier Edition release isn’t slated to be until the 27th. However quiet nature of these listings does have me wondering if AMD is purposely looking to avoid additional press at the moment – opting to silently get them into the hands of distributors to get out to their professional customers – as the company had made it clear that they’re not aiming these cards at consumers.

The Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) Review: Evolution

The Microsoft Surface Pro has undeniably carved out a new segment in the PC space. But what was once a powerful, but heavy, thick, and unwieldly tablet when it was first launched, has become a thin, light, and even more powerful tablet in the followin…