Titan X upgrade?

[SASBehrooz]

The difference between them in performance/features is much bigger than it is in price and as I said before, the 980Ti is short on VRAM and won't last 2 years of stutter free performance. Go take a look at all the 780 Ti owners compared to Titan owners - 2 years ago people said a 780 TI is futureproof/has enough VRAM and now people with them are upgrading due to running out of memory. I've always followed the same mentality as you, as you can see, having a GTX 460 that had more than enough memory during its time, which now bites me in the backside in every new game because of the VRAM shortage.

Games nowadays double in VRAM requirements every 2 years or so, and with ~£140 between them it's not even a contest.

is it really worth to burn your money for 4% extra fps ? sounds great 6GB = 4%
just before release date of the witcher III , people said we need at least 6GB VRAM for it to play in ultra settings . and now the game needs maximum 1.75 GB VRAM.
the future is unknown my friend.
you are spending too much money on useless extra 6GB VRAM.
ok buy titanX for $999. next year i buy a $300 GPU which will eat your TITAN X

 

[Schmuckley]

EVGA 980TI SC
That is all.

 

[Zero3606]

Seriously, all the problems that people are experiencing with a Titan X I'm not experiencing at all. My Titan hasn't gotten anywhere near the temp limit. At maximum load I"m running at 67 degree. Also overclocking this beast is amazing. All in all here is what it comes down to reference card to reference card the Titan X wins because of more shaders and CUDA cores. Plus, the you really don't have to worry to much about getting a good GPU die from the Titan, because it is a premium and top of the line GPU anyway. So if you have $1,000 dollars to spend on a graphics card then get a Titan X, if you don't get the 980ti for $650. either way they are high end cards. PS if you have problems cooling the Titan X because your environment is to warm get the ACX 2.0 cooler for the Titan X or a water-block and the Titan X will definitely beast on ANY CARD.

 

[Am*]

Thanks a lot for your advice, folks. After thinking for over a week deciding between a custom 980 Ti (specifically the ASUS Strix and Gigabyte's Windforce models) and a Titan X, I've decided to pick up a Titan X due to a deal too good to pass up on (was only £130 more than Gigabyte's and only £90 more than the Asus). As you can probably tell, it's more than I've ever spent (or ever will spend) on a graphics card but I've had the extra cash put aside for a card like this for ages due to not being happy with the cards I've tried to replace my 460 with in the past (including a 660, 680 and a 290x - which all got returned for a refund).

Not to worry, I've read about all of the potential issues with the Titan X, and will be testing for them thoroughly with every software program I can find -- including Furmark, for coil whine/artifacts/excess noise and anything else -- the hot weather will also make it much easier to find any issues (and realistic clock speeds) and if I get any, it will be going straight back.

I will let you all know how it goes (it will be a long bloody process, as I have 4 separate Windows installations to carry out the upgrade on).

Thanks again.

 

[purecain]

I made the same choice this morning... my first NVidia card in 10yrs. the titan x full Maxwell gpu..... cant wait for Monday... i'll meet you on the valley thread for a bench.... see how good the silicon is we both get....

exciting...

 

[AsRock]

You can run 1080P as 3200x1800 so if you really want the fury x get it lol, that way you be more ready when you actually get your new monitor.

As for the TITAN X just not worth it and if i was to spend that kinda cash i would wait ( HA ) for ther FURY and get 2 of them for the price of one TITAN X.

 

[purecain]

titan x was £779.99, compared to the weaker far noisier fury x. @ 509.99. I would of bought two only they are having problems with pump noise...

after waiting so long to upgrade I thought I'd pay the difference and treat myself...

 

[the54thvoid]

You can run 1080P as 3200x1800 so if you really want the fury x get it lol, that way you be more ready when you actually get your new monitor.

As for the TITAN X just not worth it and if i was to spend that kinda cash i would wait ( HA ) for ther FURY and get 2 of them for the price of one TITAN X.

Well, in UK, 2 Fury = (pre order price) £1010 or up to £1300. A Titan is currently as *ahem* cheap as £779-£799. So you can't get 2 for 1 Titan cost.

EDIT: ninja'd

EDIT 2: in fairness, the pump noise is definitely being rectified - kudos to AMD for fast action.

 

[Am*]

You can run 1080P as 3200x1800 so if you really want the fury x get it lol, that way you be more ready when you actually get your new monitor.

As for the TITAN X just not worth it and if i was to spend that kinda cash i would wait ( HA ) for ther FURY and get 2 of them for the price of one TITAN X.

The Fury is only about £230 or so less than a Titan X. And the problems I have with the Fury X are


- it's much slower than much cheaper cards at 1080p (on which I will still play competitively, even after I get an Ultrawide monitor) and the gap only tightens at 4k

- it can't run 3d Vision on my monitor (not a common complaint I'm sure, but I already own a capable monitor so just throwing it out there, as I do like to use it, at least until VR headsets hit mainstream next year

- my main reason, though -- I just do not trust watercooling. I build my rigs to do everything I want and for a LONG time, regardless of how badly it ages -- for example, I ran my ancient Athlon 64 rig for over 2 years AFTER building my current PC just because it had some old games and programs that would only run on the old PC due to incompatibility -- and back then, Intel and AMD were one-upping each other every year -- now CPU performance has been stale for almost 5 years and I don't see my rig struggling to run anything I need it to. And I just can't trust AIO watercoolers yet because stability and longevity are more important factors for me and I've read too many horror stories of them leaking online.

Looking at next year's Pascal slides and AMD's/Nvidia's roadmaps, next year's GPUs will be bandwidth hungry and should introduce new interfaces anyway, which will mean new PCs with PCIE replacements methinks (NVLink and whatever AMDs equivalent will be) so this upgrade will be the last one I make for this PC until I build a whole new system, so I'd rather pay the extra few quid now for double the VRAM than be kicking myself in a year or two for not coughing up the difference earlier (as I saw 780Ti users doing a while ago).

As for the 980TI, I just can't bring myself to pay over £600 quid for a card that's not fully functioning - regardless of how close it performs to the fully functioning version. I realise it sounds like a silly reason but after being on what I'd call a "compromise card" for years, I'd like not to for once.

 

[Aquinus]

As for the 980TI, I just can't bring myself to pay over £600 quid for a card that's not fully functioning - regardless of how close it performs to the fully functioning version. I realise it sounds like a silly reason but after being on what I'd call a "compromise card" for years, I'd like not to for once.

Uhh, what do you mean "not fully functioning"? If you mean how Titan does double precision math faster or has access to more nVidia tech? If so then you should be informed that none of that will benefit a gamer. Someone looking at Titan X should be someone who is thinking that a Tesla or Quadro is too expensive and is putting this GPU into a machine that's mainly a workstation. Honestly, I don't see the 6GB being a limit on the 980 Ti for anything less than 2 GPU SLI and that getting Titan X over the 980 Ti because it's close in price is just wishful thinking. In all seriousness, even the 1GB on my 6870s (in crossfire,) wasn't an issue until recently.

Honestly, I would have got the 980 Ti, the problem is that you're not really getting much more, even if it's only 130 quid (200 USD). I can think of much better places to put that money IMHO, like a better PSU or a bigger SSD or a large spinning disk if you need mass storage versus fast storage.

 

[AsRock]

Well, in UK, 2 Fury = (pre order price) £1010 or up to £1300. A Titan is currently as *ahem* cheap as £779-£799. So you can't get 2 for 1 Titan cost.

EDIT: ninja'd

EDIT 2: in fairness, the pump noise is definitely being rectified - kudos to AMD for fast action.

Did not realize he was from the UK, even Newegg over there don't stock them yet .

Either way i would wait see what the true price would be for the Fury X in the UK as like i said he has a 1080P display and he can always run it at 3200x1800 though the AMD drivers, there fore he could take advantage of that extra boost that the Fury X deliver at higher resolutions.

Titan X is a waste of money and if the Fury X or Fury when released is more than the 980 TI then even i would pick it.

But $650 is a lot and to me, £650 is daylight rip off but that's the UK for you. And as for pre order's well what you expect even more so in the UK.


But as seen as he don't want to wait and don't like water cooling the only option is the 980 TI.

 

[Am*]

Uhh, what do you mean "not fully functioning"? If you mean how Titan does double precision math faster or has access to more nVidia tech? If so then you should be informed that none of that will benefit a gamer. Someone looking at Titan X should be someone who is thinking that a Tesla or Quadro is too expensive and is putting this GPU into a machine that's mainly a workstation. Honestly, I don't see the 6GB being a limit on the 980 Ti for anything less than 2 GPU SLI and that getting Titan X over the 980 Ti because it's close in price is just wishful thinking. In all seriousness, even the 1GB on my 6870s (in crossfire,) wasn't an issue until recently.

Honestly, I would have got the 980 Ti, the problem is that you're not really getting much more, even if it's only 130 quid (200 USD). I can think of much better places to put that money IMHO, like a better PSU or a bigger SSD or a large spinning disk if you need mass storage versus fast storage.

By not fully functioning, I mean the cut down number of shaders & ROPs. If it had the exact same core specs like the Titan X has -- like the 780Ti vs Titan Black did, I would have been far more tempted to get it.

 

[purecain]

this is an enthusiast forum, is it really any surprise two of its members just bought titan X gpu's... sure we have dedicated gamers visit TPU for advice, and for them the cut down version is going to give them the best bang for their buck.

on the other hand I consider myself an enthusiast and would prefer to just buy the card with the best performance this time around.

if cooler master hadn't let down amd with the dodgy pump noise I would of gone with one of those and bought another down the line. unfortunately for amd I keep my pc on my desk next to me and it would of gotten on my nerves... fo sho!!!!!!

 

[Aquinus]

By not fully functioning, I mean the cut down number of shaders & ROPs. If it had the exact same core specs like the Titan X has -- like the 780Ti vs Titan Black did, I would have been far more tempted to get it.

You mean that you didn't learn with Fiji that specs don't mean everything? The 980 Ti out-performs the Titan X in most cases, even more so if you get a non-reference 980 Ti. Despite the specs, Titan X isn't much more of a GPU than the 980 Ti is. Titan X has features not more performance, than the 980 Ti. This doesn't say you won't enjoy the Titan X but, for 130 quid/200 USD, it is just a big waste of money for not actually getting anything tangible for it that, as a gamer, you'll probably never use. It's like buying ECC memory as a gamer. Yeah, it will work and it will probably cost more but, ECC doesn't do gamers any good much like how DP math on Titan X isn't a usual task for gamers. That's all I'm saying.

 

[the54thvoid]

You mean that you didn't learn with Fiji that specs don't mean everything? The 980 Ti out-performs the Titan X in most cases, even more so if you get a non-reference 980 Ti. Despite the specs, Titan X isn't much more of a GPU than the 980 Ti is. Titan X has features not more performance, than the 980 Ti. This doesn't say you won't enjoy the Titan X but, for 130 quid/200 USD, it is just a big waste of money for not actually getting anything tangible for it that, as a gamer, you'll probably never use. It's like buying ECC memory as a gamer. Yeah, it will work and it will probably cost more but, ECC doesn't do gamers any good much like how DP math on Titan X isn't a usual task for gamers. That's all I'm saying.

Titan X isn't Titan. The DP compute is the same as 980ti. The extra cores on the Titan give it a small boost. The only real difference is that the 980ti has custom cards out. All you have to do with your Titan is overclock it on a high power level.

Here is Guru3D's OC for both:

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/nvidia_geforce_gtx_titan_x_review,32.html

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/nvidia_geforce_gtx_980_ti_review,36.html

Titan X on left side, 980ti on right.

Titan X @ 1202/1367 core, memory @ 7806
980ti @ 1252/1452-1477 core, memory @ 7818

So with a 6% slower core clock (in the above example) the Titan X performs faster than the 980ti, due to it's higher shader count. Granted in games the win is small or in some, probably equal but the fact is - the Titan X is the better card and it does overclock reasonably well. In fact, making me think of getting one now......

 

[Aquinus]

Titan X isn't Titan. The DP compute is the same as 980ti. The extra cores on the Titan give it a small boost. The only real difference is that the 980ti has custom cards out. All you have to do with your Titan is overclock it on a high power level.

Here is Guru3D's OC for both:

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/nvidia_geforce_gtx_titan_x_review,32.html

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/nvidia_geforce_gtx_980_ti_review,36.html

Titan X on left side, 980ti on right.

Titan X @ 1202/1367 core, memory @ 7806
980ti @ 1252/1452-1477 core, memory @ 7818

So with a 6% slower core clock (in the above example) the Titan X performs faster than the 980ti, due to it's higher shader count. Granted in games the win is small or in some, probably equal but the fact is - the Titan X is the better card and it does overclock reasonably well. In fact, making me think of getting one now......

...but do you think it's really worth 130 quid over the 980 Ti? That's the point I'm making because the 980 Ti can overclock pretty well too. Either way, I still think you're practically breaking even with respect to performance. 18.3k and 17.4k are very similar scores and we're talking a synthetic benchmark here with only about a 1k difference. All I'm saying is that you're really not getting more for what you're paying for. Almost every graph you show doesn't really have more than 1-5% more performance than the 980Ti when you're paying what? 10-20% more for it?

 

[the54thvoid]

...but do you think it's really worth 130 quid over the 980 Ti? That's the point I'm making because the 980 Ti can overclock pretty well too. Either way, I still think you're practically breaking even with respect to performance. 18.3k and 17.4k are very similar scores and we're talking a synthetic benchmark here with only about a 1k difference. All I'm saying is that you're really not getting more for what you're paying for. Almost every graph you show doesn't really have more than 1-5% more performance than the 980Ti when you're paying what? 10-20% more for it?

At this end of the spectrum, you don't really consider cost. CPU's from Intel are in the same bracket - you pay £400 more for the top chip. It's not twice as good. The value is what is perceived by the consumer, not those who speculate upon it. If you want it and you can afford it, it is of value to you. If you buy a Titan because you want the full shader count and not the cut down 980ti, then it is of value to that consumer.

It's also completely fine for people to not think it is of value. Value is subjective. Cost is relative (to wealth or income).

 

[Aquinus]

If you buy a Titan because you want the full shader count and not the cut down 980ti, then it is of value to that consumer.

Seems like a big cost for just "knowing" that it's different but doesn't really "feel" any different. Point taken though, it just seems wasteful to me. Granted when I went out and bought a new car, I bought the cheapest car that fit my needs. I tend to do the same thing with... well, just about everything I buy.

To me, value is what you're getting for whatever you're paying for it. Performance and the ability to use it is what you get. It's like buying, as you said, an 8c Intel CPU for a lot more than a quad core, but it doesn't do a gamer a whole lot of good though. While on paper I'm sure a 5960X is great, for just about everyone, it doesn't get you much over an equivalent quad core. So I really hate to simply buy something because it's "not crippled" when it's not really crippled in the first place with respect to how it performs. To me, why waste that money when it could get re-invested into other parts of the PC? That's just how I look at it. I see that 200 USD and think, "That's a new SSD or 1-2 spinning disk!"

Side note: The OP is still using 1080p. I think that could be kept in mind as well.

 

[the54thvoid]

Side note: The OP is still using 1080p. I think that could be kept in mind as well.

Then yes, if not updated, total waste of money for 1080p.

There are limits to money logic after all.

 

[GreiverBlade]

eh? the difference between a titan X and a 980Ti is 150£ at MSRP ? i thought it was 240ish ... in Switzerland a Titan X is 350chf/239.05£/372.23$ more than a 980Ti
well ... the 980 is at the MSRP of the 980Ti ... and the Fury X as i said is around a 980Ti and a Titan X ... this is ridiculous, and i blame the retailer(sorry i meant the taxes not the retail... well whatever ) ... not AMD or Nvidia

so for my case a Titan X is absolutely not worth the overprice over a 980Ti (or even a 980 )

Then yes, if not updated, total waste of money for 1080p.

There are limits to money logic after all.

so do i ... i still have a 27" 1080p and a 980 (tho no money involved in the process ... ) but using DSR make it up for it, until i decide to go 1440/1600

 

[purecain]

I was thinking about the horse power needed for VR... as there's some pretty amazing things about to hit the market...

 

[haswrong]

I was thinking about the horse power needed for VR... as there's some pretty amazing things about to hit the market...

can you elaborate whats gonna hit the market? whats the maximum bearable time spent under a vr helmet before your neck starts aching?

 

[AsRock]

can you elaborate whats gonna hit the market? whats the maximum bearable time spent under a vr helmet before your neck starts aching?

Hate to think what damage it will do the eye's over time too. As for neck ache well just like the Track IR you get used to it. Like the 3DS and eye problems that come from that and tell you the truth i believe the normal DS's damage eye's too.

 

[15th Warlock]

can you elaborate whats gonna hit the market? whats the maximum bearable time spent under a vr helmet before your neck starts aching?

Lots of VR sets hitting the market between holiday season and early next year, and each new generation will increase the resolution per eye and refresh rate, cards like the 980Ti, Fury X and Titan X will be pushed to the limit to render at the framerates needed without any stutter, possibly beyond what current 4K rendering requires.

Also, I've had the Samsung VR since it came out, and never experienced any neck pain, or eyesight issues, even after long periods of gaming and watching 360° videos, these headsets are very light, and unless you have some sort of physical handicap, I don't see neck pain being an issue.

Even on the relatively underpowered Note 4, the VR experience is incredibly immersive, I've had coworkers and family members try it, most of them non gamers, and they can't get enough of it! But at this stage, even a minor stutter in the framerates can be very jarring, I can see future PC VR games using high resolution textures pushing the limits of even the fastest systems available at the moment.

Maybe VR won't be the revolution a lot of people predict it'll be, but the experience is incredibly immersive, people who compare it to fads that go out of fashion like 3D TVs most likely have not tried the technology itself, I have, in a very low tech form factor, and what little I've seen, has made me a believer

 

[Am*]

Then yes, if not updated, total waste of money for 1080p.

There are limits to money logic after all.

I'm sorry, but this is coming from a guy that bought TWO Titans back in the day? Seriously?!

And umm you do realise it's a 120Hz monitor I have, right (which overclocks to 140Hz by the way)? Now go take a look at the review and tell me how many of those games render at above my refresh rate (to which I can always add DSR/extra AA anyway). Now add 3D Vision, which performs at around half the 2D rendered framerate. Now come back and tell it's a "waste".

As for the Titan X having 'too much VRAM', I will just leave this here:

That's last year's game at 1080p, eating over 6GB of VRAM...as I said, enjoy your higher clocks and a few extra FPS from aftermarket versions of the 980 Ti in older games -- I'd rather have the extra VRAM headroom, since looking at the amount of VRAM games are gobbling up these days, the £130 extra on the Titan X will pay for itself, and since the VRAM gap between the two cards is way too high (980 Ti should have launched with at least 8GB).