NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan 6 GB

[btarunr]

Originally Posted by ThunderStorm

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

They already did a "HD 4890", it's called HD 7970 GHz Edition.

[v12dock]

Thank you AMD for not wasting your time with 'Titan'

[Vinska]

Originally Posted by v12dock

Thank you AMD for not wasting your time with 'Titan'

Is that sarcasm?

[v12dock]

Originally Posted by Vinska

Is that sarcasm?

75% more cores than the 680 for a 23% performance increase. The drivers should be optimized for the Kepler architecture already.

[Protagonist]

Originally Posted by the54thvoid

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.

Id expect the same thing too, but oh well. I have been talking about game developers being the root of all bad performance with whichever card and I'll still say game developers should stop being lazy and code games appropriately, If a console can play a game like Metal Gear Solid 4 Guns Of The Patriot in all its glory @ 1080p and the console has inferior hardware than most Gaming PCs and the gaming PC cant play a game like Borderlands 2 fluidly then its clear that the developers don't code for each GPU and ensure it runs the game very well.

Originally Posted by PatoRodrigues

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

They don't need to compete with Titan by producing another GPU, Id say AMD is on the right path with the game developers, if they get more developers to optimize games to run very well in their GPUs then that's the way to go. The hardware people have had eg since 2010 are well more than enough to run any game out there at full max at whichever res eg @ 2560x1600, problem has always been the developers not the hardware.

If developers can do so much with so little in a console and make a game glorious, they should be able to make the same game run very well even in a low end PC GPU.

Not even Titan can overcome badly codded games, till today the poorly codded games like Crysis and Metro still punish GPUs

[Melvis]

Excellent card, excellent performance but it fails where it matters the most and that's price/performance.

[Slizzo]

Originally Posted by v12dock

75% more cores than the 680 for a 23% performance increase. The drivers should be optimized for the Kepler architecture already.

That's unfair, better metric is performance per watt. Which the Titan kills on.

However, as the horse has been beaten; cost is still an overriding factor.

[Protagonist]

Family Lives Without Money—By Choice—and Thrives
http://shine.yahoo.com/financially-f...190436599.html

Ah corporations like Nvidia, AMD & Intel should take NOTE

[Phusius]

Originally Posted by Protagonist

Family Lives Without Money—By Choice—and Thrives
http://shine.yahoo.com/financially-f...190436599.html

Ah corporations like Nvidia, AMD & Intel should take NOTE

Still living off the backs of others, I read the article... so you think we should live off the backs of others? Interesting way to progress society.

[Protagonist]

Originally Posted by Phusius

Still living off the backs of others, I read the article... so you think we should live off the backs of others? Interesting way to progress society.

No i don't think its right, unless some one agrees to help you. But isn't that what Nvidia is doing living of backs of others by simply over pricing as they feel and we all know that Titan was meant to be $500 card in the first place, So the extra $500 to make Titan $1000 is to me living off the backs of others.

I don't agree to help Nvidia with an extra $500, that's why a titan is a no go for me.

At the same time the article talks about wasteful spending and to me $1000 on Titan is wasteful spending on a $500 card that's over priced.

[HumanSmoke]

Originally Posted by Protagonist

No i don't think its right, unless some one agrees to help you. But isn't that what Nvidia is doing living of backs of others I don't agree to help Nvidia with an extra $500, that's why a titan is a no go for me...

Unfortunately, you seem to have torpedoed your own argument. There are people quite willing to buy the card -which is tacit agreement between the buyer and the company. Nvidia holds no monopoly, and certainly isn't strong arming people to buy the card. You draw the line at $500- there are a huge amount of people who would balk at spending even half that amount on a card. To them (and some of them post here), buying any card over $250 is akin to burning money.

Originally Posted by Protagonist

At the same time the article talks about wasteful spending and to me $1000 on Titan is wasteful spending on a $500 card that's over priced.

And a third and fourth card of any description for SLI or CrossfireX falls into the same category. How much extra performance do you get for that third or fourth card for the expenditure ? For that matter, what about bespoke water cooling ? Using SSD's for storage or in RAID 0 ?

For you, any of these things would likely represent "wasteful spending", as probably would a luxury car, an expensive hobby, a Raymond Weil or Rolex watch, or any other number of supposedly unsound fiscal purchases...but what might be prohibitively expensive for you, might represent a drop in the bucket for others. I might spend five figures building an engine that gets 8 miles per gallon (if I'm lucky) and gets used in twelve second increments- but the enjoyment far outweighs the fiscal irresponsibility.

Pretty much any enthusiast tech purchase is a case of diminishing returns. But what's the alternative? Buy a bang-for-buck ultra safe OEM box knowing you're losing less on depreciation, and put the saved cash into T-bills ?

Where's the fun in living to be 110 years old if you have to live off bran flakes every day to get there ?

[Aquinus]

Originally Posted by HumanSmoke

Unfortunately, you seem to have torpedoed your own argument. There are people quite willing to buy the card -which is tacit agreement between the buyer and the company. Nvidia holds no monopoly, and certainly isn't strong arming people to buy the card. You draw the line at $500- there are a huge amount of people who would balk at spending even half that amount on a card. To them (and some of them post here), buying any card over $250 is akin to burning money.


And a third and fourth card of any description for SLI or CrossfireX falls into the same category. How much extra performance do you get for that third or fourth card for the expenditure ? For that matter, what about bespoke water cooling ? Using SSD's for storage or in RAID 0 ?

For you, any of these things would likely represent "wasteful spending", as probably would a luxury car, an expensive hobby, a Raymond Weil or Rolex watch, or any other number of supposedly unsound fiscal purchases...but what might be prohibitively expensive for you, might represent a drop in the bucket for others. I might spend five figures building an engine that gets 8 miles per gallon (if I'm lucky) and gets used in twelve second increments- but the enjoyment far outweighs the fiscal irresponsibility.

Pretty much any enthusiast tech purchase is a case of diminishing returns. But what's the alternative? Buy a bang-for-buck ultra safe OEM box knowing you're losing less on depreciation, and put the saved cash into T-bills ?

Where's the fun in living to be 110 years old if you have to live off bran flakes every day to get there ?

The problem with your argument is that the only way I could see someone justifying getting a Titan is someone who is planning on running multi-monitor with games. If you're getting it for anything else it is a waste because a 680 or a 7970 will do just as well and for such an exorbitant amount of money, it's simply not worth 100% more price for 20% more power.

[Protagonist]

Originally Posted by Aquinus

The problem with your argument is that the only way I could see someone justifying getting a Titan is someone who is planning on running multi-monitor with games. If you're getting it for anything else it is a waste because a 680 or a 7970 will do just as well and for such an exorbitant amount of money, it's simply not worth 100% more price for 20% more power.

^
This, just to add there are very many luxury things that people/I buy coz they make perfect sense. But Titan is not one of those considering its initial conception, it was initially conceived to be a $500 card to as far as i know, so I would love me a Titan but its a total rip off, I already donated enough to Nvidia this gen by buy a GTX670 which would have easily been a GTX660 for around $250

[Aquinus]

I also might add that I don't buy luxury items that aren't going to benefit me. I wouldn't buy a Ford Excursion because I want a v12, but because I want room and there are plenty of roomy vehicles that are like the Excursion that have just as much power in a smaller engine that eats less fuel. Simple as that.

The Titan is a beast, but it's not worth $1k USD. I think that is way off the mark.

What's the point of having the fastest GPU if hardly anyone can or is willing to afford it? At least the 7970 is relatively affordable.

[symmetrical]

If this was around $700, I would have sold my GTX 680 and bought this. But $1000, I'd rather just get the 690. Heck, at this point it looks like I'm just gonna have to go 680 SLI.

[symmetrical]

Originally Posted by Protagonist

Family Lives Without Money—By Choice—and Thrives
http://shine.yahoo.com/financially-f...190436599.html

Ah corporations like Nvidia, AMD & Intel should take NOTE

A little off topic.

But that guy worked at low paying jobs most of his life. Then decides to go to College. Graduates first, and then decides to embark on a Journey in which he will live without money with his wife and child by taking resources from others who give it to him?

Story of his life.

Anyway, how 'bout that Titan 'eh?

[Ikaruga]

Well done review, thank you very much for the great work.

But the good numbers did not surprise me tho, I expected the card to perform better at 1440p and above. It was well known that previous Keplers were bandwidth starved at high resolutions due to the 256bit wide bus.

[Aquinus]

...but for what it is, I think the numbers are rather lackluster. This is a beast of a GPU with a ton of compute hardware. I mean look at it. The number of shaders were increased by 75% over the 680 and you're lucky to find half of that in performance. It might be fast but it looks poorly optimized in comparison to the 680 and 7970 even if it is faster overall.

[Ikaruga]

Originally Posted by Aquinus

...but for what it is, I think the numbers are rather lackluster. This is a beast of a GPU with a ton of compute hardware. I mean look at it. The number of shaders were increased by 75% over the 680 and you're lucky to find half of that in performance. It might be fast but it looks poorly optimized in comparison to the 680 and 7970 even if it is faster overall.

I think the numbers probably will be much better 4-5 driver revisions later (as usual).

[Aquinus]

Originally Posted by Ikaruga

I think the numbers probably will be much better 4-5 driver revisions later (as usual).

For nVidia's sake, I certainly hope so. This is Kepler though, it's not like they just released a new kind of video card. They have experience with the platform on the 600-series cards already. I'm skeptical that we will see vastly better numbers from driver updates.

[Casecutter]

Originally Posted by Aquinus

For nVidia's sake, I certainly hope so. This is Kepler though, it's not like they just released a new kind of video card. They have experience with the platform on the 600-series cards already. I'm skeptical that we will see vastly better numbers from driver updates.

I tend to agree... I didn't hear Nvidia having any real learning curve between Fermi and Kepler. Other than changing the Cuda cores and having them run at clock speed (instead of half) I didn't hear there's much difference in the architecture overall. It's not the like AMD with GCN. Here the thing with these... verses when you by professional grade Tesla/Quattro or FirePro graphics cards, a big part of their lofty admission price means you're getting dedicated driver team to be certain you're receiving only the utmost compatibility with professional computing software. With Titian or GTX690 probably not near that, you’re just lumped in with the GTX650Ti crowd if they find 2% that’s what you’ll benefit.

[MxPhenom 216]

I hope at some point that nvidia realizes they are castrating themselves. No one will buy this card for gaming when the GTX690 costs the same and performance quite a bit better. up to 15%.

Tip for Nvidia:

Drop the price of this bitch, and I for one will buy it. $699 please? Im sure a lot of others will as well.

[cadaveca]

Originally Posted by MxPhenom 216

I hope at some point that nvidia realizes they are castrating themselves. No one will buy this card for gaming when the GTX690 costs the same and performance quite a bit better. up to 15%.

Tip for Nvidia:

Drop the price of this bitch, and I for one will buy it. $699 please? Im sure a lot of others will as well.

Well, I've got to say...

Every card at launch, for years and years...the original launch cards clock like mad. AMD, NVidia doesn't matter.


Then, prices drop...and cards stop clocking.


Both GTX680 and HD 7970 seem to follow this too, so, if you want Titan, and you want to OC it, you will buy it now, or in the future, you'll pay less, but you'll also get less. Part of what you pay for is warranty service, support, and other things, and the cost of providing such services, when a card is in limited numbers in the wild, is higher than when there are thousands upon thousands.

I hate this price, and I won't pay it myself, but I think NVidia is more than justified asking for it. It's not just performance out of the box you are buying.

[Fourstaff]

Originally Posted by Aquinus

...but for what it is, I think the numbers are rather lackluster. This is a beast of a GPU with a ton of compute hardware. I mean look at it. The number of shaders were increased by 75% over the 680 and you're lucky to find half of that in performance. It might be fast but it looks poorly optimized in comparison to the 680 and 7970 even if it is faster overall.

Or some games are CPU bounded by the Titan, worth checking. There are plenty of places for the Titan to go wrong, who is willing to do some detective work

[qubit]

Wow it didn't take long for pent up excitement to turn into a good slagging off, lol.

Yeah, I wish it would have beat the 690 too and the price been more reasonable too. It's interesting to see that the performance sits right where the predictions said it would be 6 to 9 months ago.

Still a fantastic card though. Just price it reasonably and it will be the one to have.