NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan 6 GB

[Max Mojo]

Most convincing argument:

3dMark11:

GTX Titan: P12155

versus

GTX680SLI: P14463

@stock clocks


http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages...review,21.html



3dMark11:

GTX Titan: P13248

versus

GTX680SLI: P18040 - my modest overclock dated May 2012
@occed clocks


http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages...review,25.html

[erixx]

I am not reading the whole thread but I did read the whole review, thank you W1zzard!

This card makes me watering... nVidia fails not and improves over time.

[qubit]

I've just read the review in full and I can see that even when TITAN is clocked to even faster than the GTX 690, the GTX 690 still handily beats it, as you can see below. I was somewhat surprised and disappointed by that.

I guess the reason is that the dual GK104 effectively makes for a "bigger" GPU since it has an effective bus width of 512-bit and 64 ROPs when one considers the two GPUs as one chip.

Overall, I'd love to have one, but the sky high price and the fact it doesn't beat the GTX 690 in straight-line performance even when overclocked are disappointments. I reckon that the extra RAM could allow it to beat the 690 in multiple monitor scenarios perhaps, where it's memory would max out and performance drops significantly.

[twicksisted]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

1000 bones to get 100 FPS in console ports............looking at this card makes me want to be involved in a Harlem Shuffle.

Or a cleveland steamer.

[cadaveca]

uh...wow...

[Hayder_Master]

it's worth at max $700.

[Max Mojo]

Did Vince Lucido had any choice to state something different? Isn't he working for Nvidia?

[cadaveca]

Originally Posted by Max Mojo

Did Vince Lucido had any choice to state something different? Isn't he working for Nvidia?

EVGA, I think.

Heck, he could work just for himself, for all I know.


The whole "Titan = GTX680 @ 1800 MHz" is what gets me. I don't really care about the rest.

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by cadaveca

uh...wow...

I saw "Kingpin" and was expecting a new Kingpin game. (Leaves disappointed)

[Max Mojo]

Originally Posted by cadaveca

EVGA, I think.

Heck, he could work just for himself, for all I know.


The whole "Titan = GTX680 @ 1800 MHz" is what gets me. I don't really care about the rest.

Now I remember, phoned with EVGA a year ago, they said something like he's their home clocker.

To be precise it was just: Titan < 680SLI@1260MHz.


__________________________________________________ ____________________________________

If not posted already by someone else, this sums it up:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...w,3442-13.html


"...by Chris Angelini

I gave you a handful of conclusions in Tuesday's story, and promised today’s data would back me up. Between then and now, I’ve run and re-run a bunch of data. How well do my first impressions carry through? Here’s what I said:

1) Pay the same $1,000 for a GeForce GTX 690 if you only want one dual-slot card and your case accommodates the long board. It remains the fastest graphics solution we’ve ever tested, so there's no real reason not to favor it over Titan.

We can stand by this one. Although it’s technically true that the GeForce GTX 690’s 2 GB per GPU potentially limits performance at high detail settings and resolutions, our tests at 5760x1200 didn’t turn up any troublesome numbers. Far Cry 3 was the one title that felt choppy—and that was the case even as far down as 2560x1600. I don’t think on-board memory is the issue.

2) The Titan isn’t worth $600 more than a Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition. Two of AMD’s cards are going to be faster and cost less. Of course, they’re also distractingly loud when you apply a demanding load. Make sure you have room for two dual-slot cards with one vacant space between them. Typically, I frown on such inelegance, but more speed for $200 less could be worth the trade-off in a roomy case.

This proved to be a little controversial. If you judge solely on performance per dollar, two Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition boards absolutely cost less and go faster than a GeForce GTX Titan. But there’s the case against poor acoustics. There’s also a discussion to be had about micro-stuttering. Our single-GPU frame latency numbers show that AMD has already made inroads into minimizing frame latency in some games, and that other titles remain problematic. But we can’t compare multi-GPU configs using the same tools. Fortunately, we have something coming soon that’ll address micro-stuttering more definitively. In the meantime, those Radeon cards are compelling, so long as you’re able to cope with their noise.

Given a number of driver updates, one 7970 GHz Edition is quicker than GeForce GTX 680. As long as Nvidia sells the 680 for more than AMD’s flagship, the Tahiti-based boards are going to continue turning heads.

3) Buy a GeForce GTX Titan when you want the fastest gaming experience possible from a mini-ITX machine like Falcon Northwest’s Tiki or iBuyPower’s Revolt. A 690 isn’t practical due to its length, power requirements, and axial-flow fan.

This is unequivocal. There’s no way to get anything faster than a GeForce GTX Titan into a Tiki, Revolt, Bolt, and so on. Why would you spend $1,000 on a card that tends to be slower than the GeForce GTX 690? This is why.

4) Buy a GeForce GTX Titan if you have a trio of 1920x1080/2560x1440/2560x1600 screens and fully intend to use two or three cards in SLI. In the most demanding titles, two GK110s scale much more linearly than four GK104s (dual GeForce GTX 690s). Three Titan cards are just Ludicrous Gibs!

Gaming at 5760x1200 is sort of the jumping-off point where one GeForce GTX 690 starts to look questionable. Of course, then you’re talking about $2,000 worth of graphics hardware to either go four-way GK104s or two-way GK110s. To me, the choice is easy: a pair of GeForce GTX Titans is more elegant, lower-power, and set up to accept a third card down the road, should you hit the lottery.

With all of that said, the benchmarks also reveal that OpenCL support isn’t fully-baked yet in the GeForce GTX Titan driver. A number of issues in synthetics and real-world apps make it clear that bugs still need to be stomped out, and that’s never a pleasant revelation about such a pricey piece of kit.

At least we know that GK110 does have the compute chops GK104 lacks. Developers who would have loved a Tesla K20X but couldn’t afford its almost-$8,000 price tag may consider $1,000 for a Titan true value. If, on the other hand, you’re a bitcoin miner—well, AMD’s GCN architecture still has the lock on hashing performance.

At the end of the day, we maintain that a $1,000, GeForce GTX Titan is for two very specific gamers, both of which we explicitly called out on Tuesday. Everyone else will still consider this a very fast, very well-built piece of hardware. However, it runs into serious competition in Nvidia’s stack, and from rapidly-improving Tahiti-based cards that got beaten up on pricing early on in their life."

[the54thvoid]

Umm...

Erm...

Can we all drop the pretense about value. All the arguments about if people want it they'll buy it and if they can afford it they will buy it. I have a PC saving fund currently at £4000. Obviously my PC fund when OTT so I'll put some toward my wedding....

I can afford 2, easily. Under water even.

But can I just get this out the way?

Far Cry 3 @ 2560x1600 = 32fps.

There are a couple of other shmoozies out there (Metro 2033 - i know it's badly coded). But honestly? Also the Hexus review has Dirt Showdown going to the 7970GHz when all FX used at maximum (Nvidia grumbled it's poorly optimised and pro AMD).



And again for Sleeping Dogs.



If I spend >£800 on a single card, I'd expect to get good frame rates across the board and never lose to a card costing £500 less - no matter how it was coded. You can't even buy a card for £500 less than a non 6GB 7970.

W1zzard argues crossfire fails too much - true. But Titan can't overcome a game that happens to be coded to favour the AMD card, even though Titan has mammoth grunt behind it.

Dirt Showdown and Sleeping Dogs should be taken as a warning here. No matter how good people think Titan may be it's got problems. If AMD go down the path of helping develop more games (as it is now actively doing) that £800+ monster is going to look pretty f*cking stupid.

Why do i sound pissed? Because i really wanted one but there's no chance I'm buying a card that half my PC's gpu grunt can beat if AMD help code the game.

I am not a AMD fanboy. My last post today was talking about selling my 7970's for a Titan under an EK water block (http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/sh...61&postcount=4). But seeing some of the fps results - I'd be a fool. Truly a fool. If AMD do as they say they're doing - focusing on drivers and development, I'll miss Titan out.

And ofc, Nvidia can develop drivers too but that's a cat and mouse argument. Maybe if JSH mails me a card I'll sing it's praise but damn... so disappointed.

[LAN_deRf_HA]

Originally Posted by qubit

I've just read the review in full and I can see that even when TITAN is clocked to even faster than the GTX 690, the GTX 690 still handily beats it, as you can see below. I was somewhat surprised and disappointed by that.

For comparison I got my two 660 Ti's 3gbs for $500 total. Their overclocked performance easily matches and exceeds a 690. There's just way better ways to get next years single card performance than buying a Titan.

[ThunderStorm]

And people scream at $1600 ARES II...
Titan is worth 700 at max. And how can you call Titan a flop?? Superb and unraveled performance, great power consumption compared to HD 7970's, name, crown.

Titan is a great card imho.

[HumanSmoke]

Originally Posted by KainXS

with water this card would probably clock to the sky but with this level of performance

How about 1685 MHz on LN2 ?

[Xzibit]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

I saw "Kingpin" and was expecting a new Kingpin game. (Leaves disappointed)

I was laughing at the end..

An Nvidia employee wishing he can have one. You'd think that would set off an alarm at the marketing department but i'm sure the accounting department said no $1K to meet margins.

Not to mention where he said. "We know you guys like to test the performance of the GPU in a totaly different way"

Then refers to a Air OC WTF

[Rowsol]

This is the biggest rip off ever.

[EarthDog]

Originally Posted by cadaveca

EVGA, I think.

Heck, he could work just for himself, for all I know.


The whole "Titan = GTX680 @ 1800 MHz" is what gets me. I don't really care about the rest.

you are right on both accounts. Evga and for himself, kingpin cooling for sub zero lots and such.

[Bjorn_Of_Iceland]

Impressive card. Unimpressive price.

[Delta6326]

Originally Posted by the54thvoid

Umm...

Erm...

Can we all drop the pretense about value. All the arguments about if people want it they'll buy it and if they can afford it they will buy it. I have a PC saving fund currently at £4000. Obviously my PC fund when OTT so I'll put some toward my wedding....

I can afford 2, easily. Under water even.

But can I just get this out the way?

Far Cry 3 @ 2560x1600 = 32fps.

There are a couple of other shmoozies out there (Metro 2033 - i know it's badly coded). But honestly? Also the Hexus review has Dirt Showdown going to the 7970GHz when all FX used at maximum (Nvidia grumbled it's poorly optimised and pro AMD).

http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car...f343d/Dirt.png

And again for Sleeping Dogs.

http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car...f343d/Dogs.png

If I spend >£800 on a single card, I'd expect to get good frame rates across the board and never lose to a card costing £500 less - no matter how it was coded. You can't even buy a card for £500 less than a non 6GB 7970.

W1zzard argues crossfire fails too much - true. But Titan can't overcome a game that happens to be coded to favour the AMD card, even though Titan has mammoth grunt behind it.

Dirt Showdown and Sleeping Dogs should be taken as a warning here. No matter how good people think Titan may be it's got problems. If AMD go down the path of helping develop more games (as it is now actively doing) that £800+ monster is going to look pretty f*cking stupid.

Why do i sound pissed? Because i really wanted one but there's no chance I'm buying a card that half my PC's gpu grunt can beat if AMD help code the game.

I am not a AMD fanboy. My last post today was talking about selling my 7970's for a Titan under an EK water block (http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/sh...61&postcount=4). But seeing some of the fps results - I'd be a fool. Truly a fool. If AMD do as they say they're doing - focusing on drivers and development, I'll miss Titan out.

And ofc, Nvidia can develop drivers too but that's a cat and mouse argument. Maybe if JSH mails me a card I'll sing it's praise but damn... so disappointed.

Don't worry I think with more mature driver they will fix those few games that have horrible results. and I hope that you buy 2 and water them so I can look at your pic in the WC thread.

[Fourstaff]

Originally Posted by Delta6326

Don't worry I think with more mature driver they will fix those few games that have horrible results. and I hope that you buy 2 and water them so I can look at your pic in the WC thread.

They had some time to fix the results for the GTX680, but they still haven't. Why?

[Crowned Clown]

Disappointed..., （￣へ￣） it does worth it for a price range of $550-$600 though.

[qubit]

Originally Posted by Fourstaff

They had some time to fix the results for the GTX680, but they still haven't. Why?

Cost-benefit, perhaps?

The company will be most driven to fix driver bugs and glitches in games which are more likely to sell their cards, which are inevitably blockbusters such as Call of Duty, Far Cry 3 or the latest free to play games which actually dwarf those blockbusters in revenue to the tune of 14 billion dollars.

[HumanSmoke]

Originally Posted by Fourstaff

They had some time to fix the results for the GTX680, but they still haven't. Why?

Do tell.
As far as I'm aware, the GTX 680's shortcomings are more architecturally based- late pipeline/post-process compute functions - DoF, motion blur, global illumination, ambient occlusion, hardened shadows.

No amount of driver revision is going to make the GK104 competitive in DiRT Showdown and Sleeping Dogs, precisely because the coding is compute heavy and tailored for GCN.

[PatoRodrigues]

I'm getting sick already... "over thinking" about CFX, SLI and the Titan. The price is mind-boggling. I would really love the computational power on this card but the price just isn't right and far from my reach.

I'll stick to OC'ed GTX670's... but man, nVidia knows how to produce premium cards.
Looking forward to see lottery winners from TPU making rigs with this card.

Time for AMD to take a step up and compete with GK110.

[ThunderStorm]

Originally Posted by PatoRodrigues

I'm getting sick already... "over thinking" about CFX, SLI and the Titan. The price is mind-boggling. I would really love the computational power on this card but the price just isn't right and far from my reach.

I'll stick to OC'ed GTX670's... but man, nVidia knows how to produce premium cards.
Looking forward to see lottery winners from TPU making rigs with this card.

Time for AMD to take a step up and compete with GK110.

Haha, Exactly what I'm thinking. Not likely to happen but it's nice to see another HD 4890 again.