Ya might want to check the posting rules . DAILY LIMITYou are only allowed to post one song every 24 hours . Any more and they will all be removed . <| sep |> Nope , camera hand was just behind me a bit , so it got whiteroomed forever . <| sep |> You said that HBM has more bandwidth and doesn ' t scale the same way at all . Factually false . A card with sufficient VRAM capacity to hold everything in VRAM will not be bottlenecked by the PCIe bus . A typical card shows almost no bottlenecking even when you reduce the PCIe speeds to 116 th of normal speed or l o w e r o f P C I ESpeedonGamingPerformance 518 . The Fury ' s problem is that 4 GB often isn ' t enough to hold everything in VRAM . We are now starting to get games where ultra settings take 56 GB of VRAM , and you can imagine where things will be in another couple years . Especially with DX 12 when AMD will no longer have the ability to optimize the VRAM consumption of games which they do a significant amount of now . It ' s like saying that DDR 4 is more efficient memory than DDR 3 . It doesn ' t hold more , it ' s just faster . Unless you are pushed up against the bandwidth wall it does nothing and most games show no difference between DDR 3 and DDR 4 , nor between GDDR 5 and HBM . Compare the Fury to a 390 X an older chip design GCN 1 . 1 or better yet the newer Tonga processor GCN 1 . 2 and you ' ll see , the performance scales linearly based on the number of cores , the memory does nothing special to enhance performancepercore or anything like that . You need X amount of capacity and Y amount of bandwidth and if you don ' t have enough of either you start hurting performance buBut imagine if you could have 8 GB of DDR 3 but only 4 GB of DDR 4 . The fact that the DDR 4 is faster doesn ' t really matter for the most part . And if what you need doesn ' t fit into memory , you still need to load it from a hard drive that is a factor of 1000 x slower to respond and 1000 x lower throughput than memory . When it comes down to it , memory is largely a checkbox . You need X capacity and you need Y amount of bandwidth per core . Past that , it really doesn ' t affect anything . The problem is that the Fury is very low on capacity and that can have catastrophic results on performance particularly if you look at FCAT timesmicrostutter rather than averages . Overdrawing bandwidth isn ' t good , but at least it fails gracefully . If you need twice what you have , you starve half your cores . If you need more capacity than you have , you starve all your cores for a huge period of latency . And for now , all cards are pretty overengineered on bandwidth for the moment so it ' s not really a concern . There was no need for AMD to gild that lily .