Friday, July 22nd 2016

NVIDIA Announces the GeForce GTX TITAN X Pascal

In a show of shock and awe, NVIDIA today announced its flagship graphics card based on the "Pascal" architecture, the GeForce GTX TITAN X Pascal. Market availability of the card is scheduled for August 2, 2016, priced at US $1,199. Based on the 16 nm "GP102" silicon, this graphics card is endowed with 3,584 CUDA cores spread across 56 streaming multiprocessors, 224 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and a 384-bit GDDR5X memory interface, holding 12 GB of memory.

The core is clocked at 1417 MHz, with 1531 MHz GPU Boost, and 10 Gbps memory, churning out 480 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The card draws power from a combination of 6-pin and 8-pin PCIe power connectors, the GPU's TDP is rated at 250W. NVIDIA claims that the GTX TITAN X Pascal is up to 60 percent faster than the GTX TITAN X (Maxwell), and up to 3 times faster than the original GeForce GTX TITAN.
Add your own comment

162 Comments on NVIDIA Announces the GeForce GTX TITAN X Pascal

#76
SUPERREDDEVIL
Cant wait for the RX 490 with 16 gb of HBM2. BAMM!
Posted on Reply
#77
Parn
$1200 but no HBM2? I thought at least the Titan would get that luxury treatment, but I guess I was wrong. With this thing priced so high, don't think we will see any price reduction on the 1080 and 1070 anytime soon.

Let's just hope market adoption for DX12/Vulkan is going to speed up so that the value of AMD cards will increase dramatically forcing nvidia to stop this insane pricing (milking).
Posted on Reply
#78
bug
Slizzo said:
Ehhh... one point of contention, P100 is reserved to Tesla line, nothing has been shown about a GP100.

But yeah, consumers will probably only ever see the GP102.
Actually Tesla P100 is based on GP100: https://devblogs.nvidia.com/parallelforall/inside-pascal/
But yes, Nvidia aren't going out of their way to make things easy to follow ;)
Posted on Reply
#79
bug
Parn said:
$1200 but no HBM2? I thought at least the Titan would get that luxury treatment, but I guess I was wrong. With this thing priced so high, don't think we will see any price reduction on the 1080 and 1070 anytime soon.
And you know for a fact HBM2 is needed here? Or do you just like shiny new things?
Posted on Reply
#80
Captain_Tom
bug said:
This is not a gaming card, it's pointless to compare it the GTX 1080.
Fwiw, even Nvidia isn't sure what this is, because now it's officially not part of the GeForce line and it was never part of Quadro or Tesla lines either. I've always viewed Titan cards as a "look what we can do" card that I didn't care much about.
LMAO when will the dipshits drop this strawman's argument?!


Is it called Tesla? Can it use professional drivers? F*CK NO! It says "GTX" because it is a gaming card. Period.
Posted on Reply
#81
beck24
Captain_Tom said:
LMAO when will the dipshits drop this strawman's argument?!


Is it called Tesla? Can it use professional drivers? F*CK NO! It says "GTX" because it is a gaming card. Period.
They're upset because the company they like has nothing to compete.
Posted on Reply
#82
ensabrenoir
Nobody99 said:
NVIDIA must think people forget easily, the audacity they had when they released the first Titan for 1000$ and it wasn't even fully unlocked and the audacity now thinking people would consider buying such a card after such a legacy that befalls the Titan name.

I might remotely considering buying it if they wouldn't have used the noun Titan in vain.
Nvdia responds:


HBM2 would've made it ridiculously more expensive without any added benefits over its current configuration.
Posted on Reply
#83
jabbadap
the54thvoid said:
More hardware, less clocks. 15% slower in frequency?
= more OC headroom. If it can clock any where near to gp104/gp106 freqs, OC performance gains will be great. No doubt bios power limitter will be pushing clocks down, but once you can get it round it will fly(hard mod or custom bios if pascal bios tweaker ever materialize :cry:).
Posted on Reply
#84
beck24
jabbadap said:
= more OC headroom. If it can clock any where near to gp104/gp106 freqs, OC performance gains will be great. No doubt bios power limitter will be pushing clocks down, but once you can get it round it will fly(hard mod or custom bios if pascal bios tweaker ever materialize :cry:).
Its going to produce ridiculous numbers.
Posted on Reply
#85
Vayra86
beck24 said:
Its going to produce ridiculous numbers.
No, not really, those numbers will only be fun for about 4-5 months or so. Then everyone is bored and buying the 1080ti at 2/3 the price. And at the end of the road, Titan was once again a massive cash grab.
Posted on Reply
#86
efikkan
Chaitanya said:
1200$ and stil no HBM2. Interesting way to milk money by nVidia.
Why does it matter? No graphics workload currently needs HBM.
You should care about performance, not fancy words.

btarunr said:
Both GTX 780 Ti and GTX 980 Ti were launched as response to AMD products. GTX 780 Ti was launch as response to R9 290X, and GTX 980 Ti was launched to preempt R9 Fury X. So unless AMD has something that beats GTX 1080 and gets-close-to/outperforms GTX TITAN XPascal, NVIDIA won't launch GTX 1080 Ti. If AMD's response is slower than TITAN X Pascal, GTX 1080 Ti will have fewer CUDA cores. If it's faster then NVIDIA will max out 3,840 CUDA cores present on the GP102. If it's way faster, then NVIDIA will tap into GP100. So no, GTX 1080 Ti probably won't launch till Vega10 is close, and it's not.

At this rate GP100 won't make a market debut under GeForce brand this generation. It will be shelved for the GeForce 20 series.
With what did AMD push Nvidia to release GTX 780 Ti? No, not R9 290X.
GTX 980 Ti was scheduled before R9 Fury X was known to the public.
If your logic made sense Nvidia would currently release no card more powerful than GTX 1060, since none of the new cards from AMD can beat it.

There will be no GeForce/Titan card with GP100 this year, as mentioned before, GP102 will be the fastest this year.

GP100 isn't faster than GP102 for rendering, since GP102 is essentially GP100 with FP64, NVLink and HBM removed. A graphics card with GP100 will just use ~300W instead of 250W with no benefit for rendering. I'm very happy Nvidia made non-compute version of GP100, this way we can get graphics cards with better efficiency and availability.

Assimilator said:
Jaysus. 40% more CUDA cores, 40% more TMUs, 50% more ROPs, 50% more memory bandwidth, 50% more memory... this thing is gonna be a monster. And that means 1080 Ti will be even faster.
When have the "Ti" version been faster than Titan?

PerfectWave said:
how ppl can spend all those money in a GPU that does not dupport full async?
Stop spreading this lie!
Every technically competent person knows it's fully supported.

Cybrnook2002 said:
So if this is GP102, then there is still another monster waiting in the background with full fledged GP100? Something higher than Titan X with HBM2?
No.
To what purpose? How will HBM help your gaming?
Posted on Reply
#87
LightningJR
Get your ass in gear AMD, please, not even the most rabid Nvidia fanboy likes to see a $1200 flagship card.

Even if I lived in the US making USD I wouldn't buy this card, $1200 is just too much, plain and simple.
Posted on Reply
#88
efikkan
Stop whining, this product is clearly not for you.
Titan is for (semi-)professional graphics.
Posted on Reply
#89
ppn
Titan is what 1080 should have been. Hopefully 1180 will fix that.
Posted on Reply
#90
Parn
bug said:
And you know for a fact HBM2 is needed here? Or do you just like shiny new things?
I didn't say it's needed. It's just for such a high price top-end card I would expect to see HBM2 (Pascal was supposed to receive HBM2 according to some earlier announcements last year).

This further proves there is a lack of competition in the market. If nvidia was feeling threatened by any AMD cards, I'm pretty sure they would have put HBM2 on this one even if it isn't needed to reach its max performance. Unfortunately apart from games heavily utilising async compute from Vulkan/DX12, I don't see how AMD could close the gap.
Posted on Reply
#91
Parn
efikkan said:
Why does it matter? No graphics workload currently needs HBM.
You should care about performance, not fancy words.
HBM is there not just for performance (you're right that it doesn't need it to reach max performance), but also for more compact design. I'd love to see a TITAN X Pascal or 1080Ti in the same size as Fury X while retaining optimal performance.
Posted on Reply
#92
dalekdukesboy
With what did AMD push Nvidia to release GTX 780 Ti? No, not R9 290X.
GTX 980 Ti was scheduled before R9 Fury X was known to the public.
If your logic made sense Nvidia would currently release no card more powerful than GTX 1060, since none of the new cards from AMD can beat it.

This makes perfect sense I'd say. Surely AMD hasn't released anything whatsoever before Nvidia and even now nothing that competes with several tiers of their lineup.

There will be no GeForce/Titan card with GP100 this year, as mentioned before, GP102 will be the fastest this year.

Ok, maybe no idea on this.

GP100 isn't faster than GP102 for rendering, since GP102 is essentially GP100 with FP64, NVLink and HBM removed. A graphics card with GP100 will just use ~300W instead of 250W with no benefit for rendering. I'm very happy Nvidia made non-compute version of GP100, this way we can get graphics cards with better efficiency and availability.

Huh? So you are saying the "ti" will use 50 more watts but no additional rendering "benefit"? That statement on its' face makes zero sense unless I'm missing something. Rendering is a pretty generic word so I assume that covers compute and non-compute so why would they make a card that uses more juice that isn't any "faster" and "no benefit for rendering"?
Posted on Reply
#93
TheGuruStud
Assimilator said:
Jaysus. 40% more CUDA cores, 40% more TMUs, 50% more ROPs, 50% more memory bandwidth, 50% more memory... this thing is gonna be a monster. And that means 1080 Ti will be even faster.

Seems NVIDIA is out to crush AMD absolutely this round. They could probably have got away with only releasing the GTX 1080 and 1070, but we also have the 1060 that rains on RX 480's parade, and now the TITAN X Pascal which is even faster than the 1080. If Vega is as much of a disappointment as Polaris was, AMD is in big trouble.
You're forgetting that almost no one will buy it, though. I have a 980ti and it's represented at .99% on steam's statistics. That's a high margin for a high end card. It's still only 1.34% for DX12 GPU. Do not expect that for a 1080 or the new Titan.
I couldn't find any Titan on the list. The five people using one for gaming didn't run the stats tool, I guess lol (if it even shows up, idk, same goes for Fury).

The 970 far and away leads the pack followed by even lower end cards. It's excellent for market perception, but it's not gonna fill the piggy bank like mid-range cards will.
Posted on Reply
#94
xorbe
og Titan (kepler) was a great deal at the end of the day. Maxwell Titan X sort of rustled my jimmies. I can't be the only one not planning on Pascal Titan X at $1200 this generation. I'm actually downgrading to 1060.
Posted on Reply
#95
the54thvoid
xorbe said:
og Titan (kepler) was a great deal at the end of the day. Maxwell Titan X sort of rustled my jimmies. I can't be the only one not planning on Pascal Titan X at $1200 this generation. I'm actually downgrading to 1060.
This will probably hold until Vega but given how far ahead GTX1080 is above Fury X, if the Titan X is 30% faster than a GTX1080, Vega will have to be about 50-75% faster than Fury X.

Even despite it's cost, more people would be 'willing' to buy it if they knew there was not a better card coming.

EDITED for contentious %'s.....
Posted on Reply
#96
HammerON
The Watchful Moderator
Please be respectful and civil in your posts. Name calling and/or cursing is not respectful nor civil.
Posted on Reply
#97
Captain_Tom
Caring1 said:
All those people that bought GTX 1080 in SLI must be kicking themselves, spending all that money when one card will do the job now.
Dude this won't come close to 1080 SLI. This is gonna be like 20-30% stronger than the 1080 for double the price.
Posted on Reply
#98
peche
Thermaltake fanboy
next thing on nvidia ... titan S like apple nomenclature!
coming soon ...
Posted on Reply
#99
Captain_Tom
xorbe said:
og Titan (kepler) was a great deal at the end of the day. Maxwell Titan X sort of rustled my jimmies. I can't be the only one not planning on Pascal Titan X at $1200 this generation. I'm actually downgrading to 1060.
How was it a good deal at all?

It was 40% stronger than the 7970 for 3x the money. In fact the SAPPHIRE 7970 TOXIC 6GB was only like 10% behind the Titan for almost half the price. Furthermore, if you look at the latest benchmarks the 7970 is essentially the same strength as the Titan in today's games. No matter how you dice it, the OG Titan was a massive joke. The Titan X was even less impressive for its time, and this new one is only like 25% stronger than the 1080.

I wouldn't be surprised if the next Titan was 15% stronger than the 1180 for $1500!
Posted on Reply
#100
xorbe
Captain_Tom said:
How was it a good deal at all?
I get what you're saying, it's a relative thing, it wasn't cheap. But for day one buyers though, og Titan served us well for 2 years. Maxwell Titan X didn't duplicate the satisfaction, at least for me. Guessing Titan buyers probably don't look at the Radeon stuff much in general ...
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment