Monday, February 18th 2013

NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan Graphics Card Pictured in Full

Here it is, folks; the first pictures of NVIDIA's newest pixel crunching dreadnought, the GeForce GTX Titan. Pictures leaked by various sources east of the Greenwich Median reveal a reference board design that's similar in many ways to that of the GeForce GTX 690, thanks to the magnesium alloy cooler shroud, a clear acrylic window letting you peep into the aluminum fin stack, and a large lateral blower. The card features a glowy "GeForce GTX" logo much like the GTX 690, draws power from a combination of 6-pin and 8-pin PCIe power connectors, and features two SLI bridge fingers letting you pair four of them to run 3DMark Fire Strike as if it were a console port from last decade.
The GeForce GTX Titan PCB reveals that NVIDIA isn't using a full-coverage IHS on the GK110 ASIC, rather just a support brace. This allows enthusiasts to apply TIM directly on the chip's die. The GPU is wired to a total of twenty four 2 Gbit GDDR5 memory chips, twelve on each side of the PCB. The card's VRM appears to consist of a 6+2 phase design which uses tantalum capacitors, slimline chokes, and driver-MOSFETs. The PCB features a 4-pin PWM fan power output, and a 2-pin LED logo power output that's software controllable.

Given the rumored specifications of the GTX Titan, the card could be overkill for even 2560 x 1600, and as such could be designed for 3DVision Surround (3 display) setups. Display outputs include two dual-link DVI, an HDMI, and a DisplayPort.

According to most sources, the card's specifications look something like this:
  • 28 nm GK110-based ASIC
  • 2,688 CUDA cores ("Kepler" micro-architecture)
  • 224 TMUs, 48 ROPs
  • 384-bit GDDR5 memory interface
  • 6 GB memory
  • Clocks:
  • o 837 MHz core
    o 878 MHz maximum GPU Boost
    o 6008 MHz memory
  • 250W board power
Sources: Egypt Hardware, VideoCardz
Add your own comment

118 Comments on NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan Graphics Card Pictured in Full

#1
Prima.Vera
symmetrical said:
FXAA and TXAA 4X

Although there was a bug in the beta in which TXAA made foliage look like crap.

But yeah most other games are barely hitting 1GB of VRAM, so I don't know what the other guy is talking about either.
Hmm...Why use both? As far as I read TXAA is really heavy on performance. Also, isn't an option to use just SMAA? I use it on Dead Space 3 and is by far better than any FXAA or MLAA both in performance and quality.
Cheers.
Posted on Reply
#2
tastegw
the54thvoid said:
Slides....

http://wccftech.com/nvidia-officially-unleashes-geforce-gtx-titan-gk110-gpu-decimates-single-chip-gpus/

http://cdn3.wccftech.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/er_photo_184834_52.png

I make that 37 fps to the 680, 48 to Titan = about 11-12 fps difference = only 30% faster than a 680 on this specific game.
"New Features such as GPU Boost 2.0 lets users manually overvolt and overclock their GPU without any restrictions hence achieving better clock speeds through Boost tech while users would be delighted with the new 80 Hz Vsync technology that allows better framrates in the latest gaming titles.

Read more: http://wccftech.com/nvidia-officially-unleashes-geforce-gtx-titan-gk110-gpu-decimates-single-chip-gpus/#ixzz2LGZM014A"

Nice, unlocked voltage
Posted on Reply
#3
badtaylorx
so...basically this thing is a 670sli on one chip.....

and you can use four of them....

mother of god, this is one fast card

this is as much of a war between Titan and HD7970 as a war between a man and a mosquito...
Posted on Reply
#4
eventide
Video ram usage

If you max up all graphic options in Serious Sam 3 in a mere 1920x1080, you will find yourself in need of up to 3GB vram. Proof in the screens:









Posted on Reply
#5
the54thvoid
badtaylorx said:
so...basically this thing is a 670sli on one chip.....

and you can use four of them....

mother of god, this is one fast card

this is as much of a war between Titan and HD7970 as a war between a man and a mosquito...
It's not a comparison. 7970 release was December 2011. This is February 2013. I don't even consider for a second AMD will be batting an eyelid over this. I'm quite sure they'd happily concede Titan is the far more powerful card.

It's going to hurt 690 sales if anything (or boost them). Given Nvidia's excellent track record at sli scaling and given the pricing rumours, I'd rather pay less for a higher performing 690 than a Titan card.

This is Nvidia's phallic symbol. They don't even need to sell it - just make it say - look what we can do - up yours AMD and Intel.

If it's over the cost of a 690, it is not a good proposition. Not at all. The 690 is one of the best cards ever made (IMO). The Titan is the biggest die ever made (especially considering process size). Titan stands alone as a tech achievement.

Also, referring to your man versus mosquito quote - bad call, mosquitos 'carry' malaria which kills around 3/4 million people a year. ;)
Posted on Reply
#6
Am*


Oh lord, what a turd. Not only is this card over a year late and $400 overpriced, but Nshittia could not even give us an extreme end card that is fully functional (14/15 SMX units? Get the fuck out of here Nvidia, you might as well have called it "GK110 Fail Edition"). The lazy bastards could not even be bothered to make a custom logo for it at the top, (they must have had several crates full of GTX 690 salvaged parts, which they decided to recycle on this card).

If shit stays this overpriced on the green side, I will be going back to AMD next year, even though I can easily afford 2 of these (and was actually considering buying 1 if it had all 2880 fully functional cores, for best consumer end compute performance if nothing else). I'm just waiting for the 8970 to repeat the days of the HD 4870 and rape this turd with 85%-90% performance at less than half the price (can't be that hard, judging by the image above, even with just a die shrink).

What's even MORE hilarious, were the rumours that there are "only 10,000" of these broken turds for sale...yeah and 100,000+ more to come. Good one Nshittia -- already trying to drum up demand for a card nobody wants or gives a flying shit about.

zolizoli said:
They do the same like apple: nice designe,low cost hardware,gigantic marketing= Astronomical price.
I couldn't agree more.
Posted on Reply
#7
BigMack70
the54thvoid said:
It's not a comparison. 7970 release was December 2011. This is February 2013. I don't even consider for a second AMD will be batting an eyelid over this. I'm quite sure they'd happily concede Titan is the far more powerful card.

It's going to hurt 690 sales if anything (or boost them). Given Nvidia's excellent track record at sli scaling and given the pricing rumours, I'd rather pay less for a higher performing 690 than a Titan card.

This is Nvidia's phallic symbol. They don't even need to sell it - just make it say - look what we can do - up yours AMD and Intel.

If it's over the cost of a 690, it is not a good proposition. Not at all. The 690 is one of the best cards ever made (IMO). The Titan is the biggest die ever made (especially considering process size). Titan stands alone as a tech achievement.

Also, referring to your man versus mosquito quote - bad call, mosquitos 'carry' malaria which kills around 3/4 million people a year. ;)
More or less this. The Titan isn't set to really change anything in the GPU market other than to upset AMD fanboys. It won't compete with any single GPU card because it's way too expensive, and it's not likely to be faster than the dual-GPU options currently available.

As such, this card is for:
1) Someone who really doesn't like the idea of multiple GPUs but who needs that type of performance.
2) Someone wanting to spend ~$2k on a pair of them in SLI for a setup way more awesome than anything currently available.
Posted on Reply
#8
OneCool
Maybe once the AIBs get it and drop it to 3gb vram custom coolers etc...Then the price can come down to say 600? It would be worth it.

Like it stands I can build an entire gaming rig plus monitor etc.. for the price of this Frankenstein :shadedshu



TBH for that kind of money it doesnt look good to me at all!!
Posted on Reply
#9
Prima.Vera
eventide said:
If you max up all graphic options in Serious Sam 3 in a mere 1920x1080, you will find yourself in need of up to 3GB vram.
I see that, and is kinda strange. On the same game with full details it shown on mine ~ 650MB if I recall... Most I had on Crisys and BF3 (~925)
Posted on Reply
#10
15th Warlock
the54thvoid said:
It's not a comparison. 7970 release was December 2011. This is February 2013. I don't even consider for a second AMD will be batting an eyelid over this. I'm quite sure they'd happily concede Titan is the far more powerful card.

It's going to hurt 690 sales if anything (or boost them). Given Nvidia's excellent track record at sli scaling and given the pricing rumours, I'd rather pay less for a higher performing 690 than a Titan card.

This is Nvidia's phallic symbol. They don't even need to sell it - just make it say - look what we can do - up yours AMD and Intel.

If it's over the cost of a 690, it is not a good proposition. Not at all. The 690 is one of the best cards ever made (IMO). The Titan is the biggest die ever made (especially considering process size). Titan stands alone as a tech achievement.

Also, referring to your man versus mosquito quote - bad call, mosquitos 'carry' malaria which kills around 3/4 million people a year. ;)
I mostly agree with what you say, if nVidia prices this card above the 690, they'll be shooting themselves in the foot.

I've seen some benchmarks, and this card is around 70% faster than a single 680 in best case scenarios, but that number can improve with better driver support, still, it would seem that, barring some cases, a dual 680 setup or perhaps even a single 690 may be able to beat Titan in most instances, at least in properly SLI supported games (which is the vast majority of current games)

But let's not be hasty and jump to conclusions, remember there were rumors that the 680 was gonna be priced at $699 before it came out, and we all know how that turned out, if nVidia can price this card in the right slot, they may have a winner in their hands :)
Posted on Reply
#11
Horrux
25% faster than a 7970 ghz edition is pretty good. But it's just that - pretty good, especially given that the AMD GPU is over a year old. A 25% performance boost in a year is pretty ho-hum if you ask me.
Posted on Reply
#12
erocker
Horrux said:
25% faster than a 7970 ghz edition is pretty good. But it's just that - pretty good, especially given that the AMD GPU is over a year old. A 25% performance boost in a year is pretty ho-hum if you ask me.
If this is the case, the card isn't worth more than $600 bucks.
Posted on Reply
#13
the54thvoid
Horrux said:
25% faster than a 7970 ghz edition is pretty good. But it's just that - pretty good, especially given that the AMD GPU is over a year old. A 25% performance boost in a year is pretty ho-hum if you ask me.
erocker said:
If this is the case, the card isn't worth more than $600 bucks.
Bad percentages. The 7970 has 74% the performance of the Titan. It actually makes the Titan, 35% faster than the 7970, based on...

Titan 100% = 100fps
7970 74% = 74fps
therefore 100-74 = 26fps difference = 26/74 = 35(%).

The price performance though still sucks. If it's twice the price of a 7970GHz, it's losing big time. IMO, 680's should have dropped in price to match 7970's and that would let Titan roll in about 50% more expensive.

But we don't know all for sure yet......
Posted on Reply
#14
bpgt64
I love the people posting in this thread complaining about price. Nvidia and AMD are FOR-PROFIT companies. Don't like the price, don't buy it? The only company that appears to care about your feelings is one that's spent money in advertizing to create that image.

Companies place products at every price point they think they can make money at. Why that does that seem to upset people so.

The advantage to this card is it's the first non sli based single slot card that might be able to handle 1440-1600p without issues. I am rocking twin GTX 670s, and there are just some games that do not optimize for SLI at all.
Posted on Reply
#15
tastegw
Y'all looking at a chart for 1920x1200 and complaining, just wait for real reviews with real benchmarks.

I bet both the Titan and the 7970 would be close at 800x600
Posted on Reply
#16
erocker
I don't see anyone upset. I see people having a conversation about the card, it's performance and how price relates to it.

tastegw said:
I bet both the Titan and the 7970 would be close at 800x600
hahahaha!!
Posted on Reply
#17
BigMack70
bpgt64 said:
I love the people posting in this thread complaining about price. Nvidia and AMD are FOR-PROFIT companies. Don't like the price, don't buy it? The only company that appears to care about your feelings is one that's spent money in advertizing to create that image.

Companies place products at every price point they think they can make money at. Why that does that seem to upset people so.

The advantage to this card is it's the first non sli based single slot card that might be able to handle 1440-1600p without issues. I am rocking twin GTX 670s, and there are just some games that do not optimize for SLI at all.
Posting that a 680/7970 +35% performing card selling at 680/7970 +100% price point isn't complaining, it's pointing out that this card has next to zero value.

Also, 680/7970 +35% performance isn't going to change the 1440/1600p landscape all that much. Dual card configs will still be preferable by far for anyone wanting to push 60fps at max settings in all the most demanding games.

Where I can see this card having value is SLI for triple-monitor.
Posted on Reply
#18
HumanSmoke
erocker said:
I don't see anyone upset. I see people having a conversation about the card, it's performance and how price relates to it.
Well, that's easy to sum up; The more extreme the price and performance, the lower the performance per dollar and the higher the incidence that buyers will 1. Have a different perspective on the price (and likely more disposable income), and 2. Have a different perspective on an upper price limit for their hobby/passion.
Cases in point- any tri/quad gaming GPU setup, a $1600 Asus Ares II, sub-zero/refrigerated/bespoke water cooling etc., etc...
Posted on Reply
#19
Crap Daddy
That chart still gives hope. If in real games scenarios it's anywhere between 35 to 50% better than a 680 at lower clocks and if overclocking is allowed fully we might see this expensive beast reaching 690 levels. The catch with the price is obvious, limited supply and overkill 6GB VRAM : luxury product. Price/perf is not what NV is after, it's rather premium brand statement. Take it or leave it. There is simply no better single GPU card (by a considerable margin) in existence.
Posted on Reply
#20
Delta6326
I will wait for W1zz review, but I'm hopping the Titan is about 10-25% slower than the 690(well it would be sweet if it was as fast...)

But my big ?? is when the Titan comes out and then the GTX 780 is the 780 supposed to be faster or slower than the Titan? If it's slower than we don't have much to look forward too, but if its going to be faster than that will be sweet.
Posted on Reply
#21
d1nky
whats the point in having the best???, when the fun is in tweaking, trying to improve your performance and spending that money on urrm girls or maybe drugs lol
Posted on Reply
#22
HumanSmoke
Crap Daddy said:
That chart still gives hope. If in real games scenarios it's anywhere between 35 to 50% better than a 680 at lower clocks and if overclocking is allowed fully we might see this expensive beast reaching 690 levels.
I took from the leaks so far that the Titan would support overvolting based upon thermal dissipation, which could add substantially to the OC potential. It might just explain W1ZZ's teaser





[source]

EDIT: Same info that tastegw linked to, tho' EH seems to be the original source material for WCCF (quelle surprise)
Posted on Reply
#23
Horrux
the54thvoid said:
Bad percentages. The 7970 has 74% the performance of the Titan. It actually makes the Titan, 35% faster than the 7970, based on...

Titan 100% = 100fps
7970 74% = 74fps
therefore 100-74 = 26fps difference = 26/74 = 35(%).

The price performance though still sucks. If it's twice the price of a 7970GHz, it's losing big time. IMO, 680's should have dropped in price to match 7970's and that would let Titan roll in about 50% more expensive.

But we don't know all for sure yet......
You got your data from the slide?

Yeah, me too, except I took into account that it's an nVidia slide, which is bound to make the Titan look relatively good. They aren't using a representative bunch of benchmarks, they're using those that make the Titan look good. So, I decided to take the scoring that makes it look the least good off that slide, given its bias, in an un-scientific attempt to un-bias things.

It's all guesswork at this point anyway, right?

So I stand by my 25% number, with the annotation that it provides 25% more FPS. Doesn't mean that the card is only 25% faster, though.
Posted on Reply
#24
bpgt64
No one buying this card is going to use it at 1900x1200. If they are, they should kick themselves in the head. The only reason to buy this card, over a GTX 680 is for 2560x1600/1440 resolutions.
Posted on Reply
#25
Horrux
bpgt64 said:
No one buying this card is going to use it at 1900x1200. If they are, they should kick themselves in the head. The only reason to buy this card, over a GTX 680 is for 2560x1600/1440 resolutions.
You think this card can max out games at even 1080p at 120fps?

I doubt it will do so for MOST games. Some, sure, but not most. Still need 2 of 'em.

Unless you are one of those people still using 60hz dinosaur-monitors. :D
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment