Next generation = 512-bit ?

[chrisf6969]

There's all kinds of buzz about the 40k 3dmark, ATI's next generation part, etc....

And I'm wondering what you guys think will be the next gen. memory interface.

I'm thinking that the high end would probably have 512-bit they could double the bandwidth with out having to increase the memory past the already insane 1+Ghz speeds. Or with out having to use another "new" memory technology.

I was thinking they could also possibly use Turbo cache (or ATI's equivalent) even on their highend for some addition bandwidth maybe for the the SM3.0 processing or something.

 

[Ether]

I said other since I'm not really sure where XDR fits into that list.

 

[mentok1982]

The next generation I think will have increased size.

After that 512 bit maybe.

 

[pxc]

XDR isn't very scalable yet because even a 64-bit (4 x 16-bit interfaces) bus is limited to 256MB with current memory densities. Plus that 64-bit bus only gives about 25GB/s of bandwidth using 3.2GHz XDR parts.

XDR has no advantage over current 256-bit GDDR3 memory for bandwidth, but does have an advantage for fewer traces (and possibly fewer circuit board layers).

I guessed it would stay at 256-bit and just go to higher speed GDDR3 memory.

edit: you're more likely to see 512-bit and wider busses when desktop/gaming graphics chips start getting embedded memory (or memory in the same package).

 

[SnakEyez187]

I'm thinking that the high end would probably have 512-bit they could double the bandwidth with out having to increase the memory past the already insane 1+Ghz speeds.

And instead have an insane amount of PCB layers and an insane price

 

[Kronix1337]

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21382

 

[ameoba]

ATA, SCSI, Firewire...

why not serial RAM?

 

[chrisf6969]

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21382

I don't think doubling the ram to 512Mb alone would double the score. It doesnt make sense. Especially not for 3dmark2001. More ram has hardly ever made a benchmark higher except in AA situations.