1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Samsung Begins Production of High-performance GDDR5 Memory Using 50-nm Technology

Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Feb 12, 2009.

  1. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,747 (11.14/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,676
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., the world leader in advanced memory technology and the leading producer of high-end graphics memory, announced today that it has begun mass producing GDDR5 graphics memory using 50-nanometer class process technology.

    "Our early 2009 introduction of GDDR5 chips will help us to meet the growing demand for higher performance graphics memory in PCs, graphic cards and game consoles," said Mueez Deen, director, mobile and graphics memory, Samsung Semiconductor, Inc. "Because GDDR5 is the fastest and highest performing memory in the world, we're able to improve the gaming experience with it across all platforms," he added.

    [​IMG]

    Designed to support a maximum data transfer speed of 7.0Gbps, Samsung's GDDR5 will render more life-like (3D) imaging with a maximum 28GB/s bandwidth, which is more than twice that of the previous fastest graphics memory bandwidth of 12.8GB/s for GDDR4. The ultra-fast processing speed is equivalent to transferring nineteen 1.5GB DVD resolution movies in one second. The high image processing speed of the GDDR5 also supports the latest data formats (Blu-ray and full HD).

    Unlike GDDR4, which processes data and images using the strobe-and-clock technique, the processing speed of the GDDR5 is much faster because it operates with a free-running clock that does not require the data read/write function to be synchronized to the operations of the clock. By adopting 50nm class technology, Samsung expects production efficiency to rise 100 percent over 60nm class technology. In addition, Samsung's GDDR5 operates at 1.35 volts (V), which represents a 20 percent reduction in power consumption compared to the 1.8V at which GDDR4 devices operate.

    Now available in a 32Megabit (Mb) x32 configuration and also configurable as a 64Mb x16 device, Samsung expects GDDR5 to account for over 20 percent of the total graphic memory market in 2009. The company also said it plans to expand the 50-nm process technology throughout its graphics memory line-up this year.

    Source: Samsung
     
  2. jbunch07

    jbunch07 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2008
    Messages:
    5,261 (2.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    614
    Location:
    Chattanooga,TN
    So I guess that means current video cards using GDDR5 are using the 60nm technology?
     
  3. Weer New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,417 (0.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    94
    Location:
    New York / Israel
    "Samsung expects production efficiency to rise 100 percent over 60nm class technology."
     
  4. jbunch07

    jbunch07 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2008
    Messages:
    5,261 (2.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    614
    Location:
    Chattanooga,TN
    Ah, Must Must have overlooked that. :eek:
    Looks good to me though.
     
  5. Fhgwghads

    Fhgwghads New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2007
    Messages:
    28 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Hopefully it gives enough incentive for Nvidia to move to GDDR5, seems like a good move if it's going to deliver the performance boost Samsung is saying it will.
     
    dalekdukesboy says thanks.
  6. eidairaman1

    eidairaman1

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2007
    Messages:
    13,074 (4.88/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,652
    i see AMD breaking contract with Quimonda and moving back to Samsung.
     
  7. Weer New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,417 (0.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    94
    Location:
    New York / Israel
    What's the point of expensive RAM when you can just increase the bus width?
     
  8. LAN_deRf_HA

    LAN_deRf_HA

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    Messages:
    4,557 (1.90/day)
    Thanks Received:
    952
    Expensive ram is more favorable than an expensive bus, simplifies the pcb design and in the case of gddr5 even more so because of the circuit traces not needing to waste all that space with extra squiggles.
     
  9. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    Because increasing the bus and using GDDR3 is more expensive than just buying GDDR5 to begin with.
     
    eidairaman1 says thanks.
  10. Weer New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,417 (0.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    94
    Location:
    New York / Israel
    And how on earth does that make sense? (seriously speaking)

    Increasing the bus does not cost money.
     
  11. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    Yes it most certainly does. It increases pcb complexity tremendously. It's more expensive from both an R&D standpoint, and also a manufacturing standpoint.
     
  12. Weer New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,417 (0.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    94
    Location:
    New York / Israel
    That's insane! Just because you have to trace a few more lines on the PCB is costs more than RAM that is clocked twice as high? Stupid laws of physics and reality..
     
  13. AsRock

    AsRock TPU addict

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Messages:
    11,021 (4.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,733
    Location:
    US
    Do not forget the extra layers of PCB required so you can get every thing to go to A to B so to speak.

    Would be nice to see how this ram would do on a 4870 x2 lol.
     
  14. jbunch07

    jbunch07 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2008
    Messages:
    5,261 (2.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    614
    Location:
    Chattanooga,TN
    I was wondering the same thing. :ohwell:
     
  15. BazookaJoe

    BazookaJoe

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Messages:
    869 (0.39/day)
    Thanks Received:
    235
    :\ - Yeah - I'm afraid i have to agree that Bus width is far more beneficial to any graphically intensive application than Ram Clocks (Although there has to be a balance between the two)

    If either one leads too far ahead of the other its just a total waste overall.

    The only real solution would be to integrate the ram & the gpu .. see what ppl seem to forget is that electronic impulses take TIME to travel along the tracks on a PCB.. .the real enemy here is the distance between the ram and the GPU.

    Once you start working at the multi-gigahertz level, even the extra time taken for that pulse to travel an extra half an inch can be a significant problem.

    Until we start putting the two closer together, there really are real-world physics based limitations that the designers have to deal with, and cant avoid.

    (See : Intel moving nothbridge into CPU & others)
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  16. Fhgwghads

    Fhgwghads New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2007
    Messages:
    28 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3

    Is that one of the reasons why Nvidia is still using ddr3 on most of their video cards?
     
  17. eidairaman1

    eidairaman1

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2007
    Messages:
    13,074 (4.88/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,652
    that inturn makes the board higher priced.
     
  18. Lazzer408

    Lazzer408

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2007
    Messages:
    2,547 (0.89/day)
    Thanks Received:
    338
    Location:
    Illinois
    it doesnt cost anymore to lay/etch 10 traces or 1000 traces other then initial layout.
     
  19. eidairaman1

    eidairaman1

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2007
    Messages:
    13,074 (4.88/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,652
    actually it does, because why would intel release several different sockets for the Core i series then, 1366 has the most traces= costly, and then the 1156 has like the least= cheapest.
     
  20. Lazzer408

    Lazzer408

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2007
    Messages:
    2,547 (0.89/day)
    Thanks Received:
    338
    Location:
    Illinois
    They charge whatever they want. It all depends on what the market analysis team came up with. A product's cost is in no way shape or form any indication of production cost. Obviously you can't compair a car to a pencil but two different board layouts/designs have very minimal cost difference. Take CPUs for example. A 2ghz could have the same core as a 3ghz with only a multiplier lock changed yet the cost can be 3 fold.

    Technology is getting to the point where manufacturer's are limited by the electrical connections to devices. The only cheap and easy solution to that is parallel lanes. They have come up with some ideas like BGA connection to the PCB and LGA sockets. Back in the 478 days Intel told me the 478 socket had a limit of 4ghz before the pins became "little antennas" as they said.

    Videocards have 256bit memory address. Why so wide? Why not just make faster ram? Because you can't get the performance out of it that's why.

    To get back on topic, it is a good thing to see lower power consumption. This leads to higher speeds. You have to remember that they can't jump too far ahead or they'll loose money. If ATI made say a 4870x12 single slot card, and charged $200 for it, what would that do to the graphics market? It would be ruined. We'd all own 2 of them and not need an upgrade for 5 years.
     
  21. kurik New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2004
    Messages:
    30 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    You are both right and wrong about this. You are right that the cost differance is basically 0 when it comes to 10 tracers vs 1000 traces. But you must also consider that having 1000 traces involves having multiple layers (i think most gfx boards use 10-12 layers?). Add to that that the increased number of layers/traces also means via holes that need to be drilled (tooling costs) and get copper plating. Not even mentioning the R&D costs of making these complex boards.
     
  22. Lazzer408

    Lazzer408

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2007
    Messages:
    2,547 (0.89/day)
    Thanks Received:
    338
    Location:
    Illinois
    A drop in the bucket for a manufacture. If 12 layers cost them $5 it would literally be less then $1 to add 2 more layers.

    They won't make something like 512bit memory addressing anyways because they feel we dont need it yet. It's all marketing. We get the more profitable technology available. Not the fastest.
     
  23. eidairaman1

    eidairaman1

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2007
    Messages:
    13,074 (4.88/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,652
    well companies have to make a profit and i don't see you owning a 4870 so why should you complain about this? Btw Profit is what all companies have to make, no profit means nothing better is released, thus jobs are lost etc.
     
  24. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    The HD2900 had a 512bit bus, as does the current GTX 280/285.

    And $1 across millions of boards adds up pretty quickly. It's still significant, and that likely only covers the material costs, and not the tooling costs. Overall, the 512bit bus with GDDR3 is more expensive to both develop and manufacture than the 256bit bus with GDDR5.
     
  25. Lazzer408

    Lazzer408

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2007
    Messages:
    2,547 (0.89/day)
    Thanks Received:
    338
    Location:
    Illinois
    So we get slower cards so someone can get a new Mclaren :D
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page