I remember one of the primary driving factors of cost on the R9 Fury cards (Fury, Nano and Fury X, as well as stuff like the Radeon Pro Duo) being the ridiculous cost of HBM manufacturing. Given that it’s, well, stacked memory with little room for manufacturing defects, it was not cheap to manufacture.
I want to say that this was also the primary reason that the RX Vega cards (Vega 56 and 64 more accurately) were cheaper than their Fury counterparts - less memory modules that were insanely expensive to make means, well, a less expensive card. I could honestly see why AMD ended up dropping HBM for consumer graphics cards, as its ridiculous memory bandwidth advantage was diminished heavily by its buy-in cost and the rise in suitable gaming performance of GDDR5/6 memory, even if it meant that the cards consumed more power.
I remember one of the primary driving factors of cost on the R9 Fury cards (Fury, Nano and Fury X, as well as stuff like the Radeon Pro Duo) being the ridiculous cost of HBM manufacturing. Given that it’s, well, stacked memory with little room for manufacturing defects, it was not cheap to manufacture.
I want to say that this was also the primary reason that the RX Vega cards (Vega 56 and 64 more accurately) were cheaper than their Fury counterparts - less memory modules that were insanely expensive to make means, well, a less expensive card. I could honestly see why AMD ended up dropping HBM for consumer graphics cards, as its ridiculous memory bandwidth advantage was diminished heavily by its buy-in cost and the rise in suitable gaming performance of GDDR5/6 memory, even if it meant that the cards consumed more power.