980 Ti

Why wouldn't the 980ti be priced similar to the 780ti when it came out? That was the exact same scenario. The Titan was a 6gb card for a $1000 then the 780ti with 3gb for like $699. If it's anymore than that you can guarantee I won't be giving greedy Nvidia my money.

The difference is AMD has 390x card to complete so it'll need to be priced accordingly. Either the 390x will be cheaper or the 980ti. Either way I don't think we'll be seeing $800 cards. There never has been or there never should that expensive single gpu cards. It's absolute BS that Gpu prices are getting this high in the first place.
 
Priced at $800 you might as well grab a $999 Titan X - even if it is just a marginal performance gain. Now priced at $700, one would start to wonder if that $300 is worth it.
 
TheHobbyist said:
The custom cards will not only have better coolers, but better vrms. These two things will allow for greater overclocks than Titan x
Click to expand...

Yeah, ok.

Luck of the draw on your gpu is all that will matter.

I had three MSI GTX680 lightning. One could overclock higher than my reference 680 without a serious voltage bump on water.
 
WorldExclusive said:
Don't be surprised if you can't log into [H] because of trolling.
Click to expand...

Its not trolling. And World, you can stop with your "high and mighty" complex on here any time.

And as a current pissed off 970 user, 5.5GB is a VERY VALID concern considering it is a cut down version of the Titan X. And we won't know for sure till cards are in consumers hands.
 
Actually we'll know as soon as the NDA lifts and we see all the reviews. Next Day Air shipping still means next day. :)
 
Not this 970 nonsense again. Your 970s perform perfectly, so STFU with that crap.

The 980 Ti instantly made the Titan X irrelevant. No, you don't need a 12 GB frame buffer, we all knew that anyway.
 
SnowBeast said:
Its not trolling. And World, you can stop with your "high and mighty" complex on here any time.

And as a current pissed off 970 user, 5.5GB is a VERY VALID concern considering it is a cut down version of the Titan X. And we won't know for sure till cards are in consumers hands.
Click to expand...

Maybe it will come in pink also. That has a higher possibility than your 5.5GB concern.
 
If you game at 1080P or possibly 1440P the Titan X is not for you. Anything higher at max settings, you will want more VRAM than 6GB. Several games I play at 3440x1440 push over 6GB of VRAM. Shadow of Mordor, GTA V, Assassins Creed Unity to name 3. Wouldn't be surprised if the new Batman game pushed VRAM too. Call them unoptimized if you want, end of the day 6GB is not enough to run them maxed out, and isn't that why we buy these high end cards? To Max out all our games...




Titan X is not irrelevant. And to those that say a overclocked 980TI can match a Titan X...guess what? Titan X can overclock like a beast too.
 
pandora's box said:
If you game at 1080P or possibly 1440P the Titan X is not for you. Anything higher at max settings, you will want more VRAM than 6GB. Several games I play at 3440x1440 push over 6GB of VRAM. Shadow of Mordor, GTA V, Assassins Creed Unity to name 3. Wouldn't be surprised if the new Batman game pushed VRAM too. Call them unoptimized if you want, end of the day 6GB is not enough to run them maxed out, and isn't that why we buy these high end cards? To Max out all our games...
Click to expand...

For the first time, when increasing MSAA in 4K or running DSR 8K, I saw 6GB just wasn't enough for GTA V.
Also in Project Cars, 4GB also showed it's limitation and I can see 6GB also coming up short once the AA is applied.

I'm kinda leaning towards the Titan X, but I hope the 390X is 8GB to save on cash.
The 980Ti is becoming less of an option for me, but... if the price is right....>$599, I'll just wait until next year for a big VRAM card.
 
The way I look at it: I plan on keeping my Titan X's for at least 2 years. If we look back 2 years ago we had 3GB cards being mainstream and 4GB becoming the new standard. Fast forward to today and 4GB is mainstream and barely enough. Makes you wonder what next year will bring in terms of VRAM requirements.
 
I managed to get GTA V settings to 8K (DSR) maxed using 18GB of VRAM.

Of course I believe you'll need 3-4 Titan X cards to get playable frames, reducing the MSAA to 4x (11GB).
Seeing games scaling up to 8GB VRAM usage is very eye-opening for what is to come.
 
WorldExclusive said:
I managed to get GTA V settings to 8K (DSR) maxed using 18GB of VRAM.

Of course I believe you'll need 3-4 Titan X cards to get playable frames, reducing the MSAA to 4x (11GB).
Seeing games scaling up to 8GB VRAM usage is very eye-opening for what is to come.
Click to expand...
Surely you are not that clueless to think you were actually using 18 GB of vram. There is not even a card made with that much vram so why would you say something so ridiculous? The vram usage shown in GTA V is bugged as its just multiplied by the cards being used. Your sig shows 980 SLI which means the most vram you could show in GTA V is 8 GB anyway.
 
WorldExclusive said:
I managed to get GTA V settings to 8K (DSR) maxed using 18GB of VRAM.

Of course I believe you'll need 3-4 Titan X cards to get playable frames, reducing the MSAA to 4x (11GB).
Seeing games scaling up to 8GB VRAM usage is very eye-opening for what is to come.
Click to expand...



...


1: GTA V just multiplies what it shows for VRAM usage based on the number of cards in your system.


2. In SLI and Crossfire your VRAM pool is not doubled. adding a second Titan X doesn't mean you have 24GB of VRAM available. In DirectX 12 that might change but I bet the game has to be programmed for it.
 
misterbobby said:
Surely you are not that clueless to think you were actually using 18 GB of vram. There is not even a card made with that much vram so why would you say something so ridiculous?
Click to expand...

Not defending this moronic arguement, but you may want to check your facts first. The Tesla K80 is a video card and it has 24gb of VRAM. Granted it's a compute card and not for gaming, but still...
 
pandora's box said:
The way I look at it: I plan on keeping my Titan X's for at least 2 years. If we look back 2 years ago we had 3GB cards being mainstream and 4GB becoming the new standard. Fast forward to today and 4GB is mainstream and barely enough. Makes you wonder what next year will bring in terms of VRAM requirements.
Click to expand...

I partially agree with you. If we look back 2 years ago new consoles were released with a lot more ram than before. However the this middle period of cards shouldn't require another huge boost in the amount of vram aside from a game here or there.
 
Supercharged_Z06 said:
Not defending this moronic arguement, but you may want to check your facts first. The Tesla K80 is a video card and it has 24gb of VRAM. Granted it's a compute card and not for gaming, but still...
Click to expand...
Well I thought it was a given that I was referring to normal desktop gpus...
 
rumartinez89 said:
I partially agree with you. If we look back 2 years ago new consoles were released with a lot more ram than before. However the this middle period of cards shouldn't require another huge boost in the amount of vram aside from a game here or there.
Click to expand...

We shall see, could argue that as the developers get more familiar with consoles the system requirements for the PC ports of them will be going up.
 
Technically the Tesla K80 is a GPU accelerator, not a video card. Also it only has 12GB per GPU.


jvGwcph.png



http://www.nvidia.com/object/tesla-servers.html
 
misterbobby said:
Surely you are not that clueless to think you were actually using 18 GB of vram. There is not even a card made with that much vram so why would you say something so ridiculous? The vram usage shown in GTA V is bugged as its just multiplied by the cards being used. Your sig shows 980 SLI which means the most vram you could show in GTA V is 8 GB anyway.
Click to expand...

Shows your lack of reading comprehension and understanding of VRAM usage.
I got it up to 18GB in the "settings". The very next line I stated 11GB settings for the Titan X.
Also, I can't double my VRAM with 980 SLI.

You read what you wanted to hear.

pandora's box said:
...


1: GTA V just multiplies what it shows for VRAM usage based on the number of cards in your system.


2. In SLI and Crossfire your VRAM pool is not doubled. adding a second Titan X doesn't mean you have 24GB of VRAM available. In DirectX 12 that might change but I bet the game has to be programmed for it.
Click to expand...

You didn't read it correctly also.

4GB is 4GB, that all the game will see with my 980s, but in GTA you can max the settings beyond the limit just to see what would you need to run it.
I didn't run those settings, only seeing what's possible.
 
WorldExclusive said:
Shows your lack of reading comprehension and understanding of VRAM usage.
I got it up to 18GB in the "settings". The very next line I stated 11GB settings for the Titan X.
Also, I can't double my VRAM with 980 SLI.

You read what you wanted to hear.



You didn't read it correctly also.

4GB is 4GB, that all the game will see with my 980s, but in GTA you can max the settings beyond the limit just to see what would you need to run it.
I didn't run those settings, only seeing what's possible.
Click to expand...
And you you still dont get it. :rolleyes:
 
pandora's box said:
The way I look at it: I plan on keeping my Titan X's for at least 2 years. If we look back 2 years ago we had 3GB cards being mainstream and 4GB becoming the new standard. Fast forward to today and 4GB is mainstream and barely enough. Makes you wonder what next year will bring in terms of VRAM requirements.
Click to expand...

Simple - ram requirments will be nearly same in 2 years as they are now. We already made transition to PS4/One consoles with 5,5 GB ram available to game makers.

Well unless Nvidia starts paying to devs for 8k textures in game works titles to exploit HBM1 weakness :D
 
misterbobby said:
And you you still dont get it. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

There's no way possible to play at these "settings", but it's a good way to see if your GPU has enough VRAM for the settings you want, whether your playing on a 1GB card or 12GB card.

Here's the screenshot so you can understand:

I3ODfbY.jpg
 
WorldExclusive said:
There's no way possible to play at these "settings", but it's a good way to see if your GPU has enough VRAM for the settings you want, whether your playing on a 1GB card or 12GB card.

Here's the screenshot so you can understand:

I3ODfbY.jpg
Click to expand...

okay wtf no game is going to run decently at those resolutions. and those "requirements" are never correct. i have hit almost 6 gb in several games at my 3440X1440 resolution so yes vram usuage may go up to higher since consoles can handle around 6 gb as well as they have 8 gb and use a a gig or so of that amount. Then you give pc ultra textures, AA, and higher resolution above 3440X1440 and the console port on a pc can use more than 6 gb. at 1080p or 1440 non ultrawide will probably unlikey go above 6 gb.

Basically titan x is for anyone above 1440 @ 16:9 and 980 ti is for anyone at or below 1440 @16:9
 
Last edited:
pandora's box said:
...and isn't that why we buy these high end cards? To Max out all our games....
Click to expand...

Actually not really. I don't need everything at absolute max. 2x-4x AA is enough to get things taken care of usually. Using the highest-res display, If you break off the knobs on every single thing you'll always need 4 of the top-end card. 4K with 2-4x AA and I'm good.90% of the way there without paying another $xxxx. Diminishing returns. I'm sure there's settings in some games that can bury quad Titan-Xs - why would you want to do that? What's the point. Often there's little to no visual difference anyway. No wonder people think we need 12GB cards - they intentionally, blindly max out everything.
 
Brahmzy said:
Actually not really. I don't need everything at absolute max. 2x-4x AA is enough to get things taken care of usually. Using the highest-res display, If you break off the knobs on every single thing you'll always need 4 of the top-end card. 4K with 2-4x AA and I'm good.90% of the way there without paying another $xxxx. Diminishing returns. I'm sure there's settings in some games that can bury quad Titan-Xs - why would you want to do that? What's the point. Often there's little to no visual difference anyway. No wonder people think we need 12GB cards - they intentionally, blindly max out everything.
Click to expand...

Well you don't need to run AA when you have 4k resolution. There won't be too much to smooth out. And right now games on ultra with 4k no AA use more than 6 gb as well as 3440 X1440 with AA. There was a post showing this in multiple games. You can also see youtube videos of frametimes and the constant drops when vram is insufficient. Just because the games you play don't go over 6gb doesn't mean no games does and that future games won't.
 
lee0539 said:
Well you don't need to run AA when you have 4k resolution. There won't be too much to smooth out. And right now games on ultra with 4k no AA use more than 6 gb as well as 3440 X1440 with AA. There was a post showing this in multiple games. You can also see youtube videos of frametimes and the constant drops when vram is insufficient. Just because the games you play don't go over 6gb doesn't mean no games does and that future games won't.
Click to expand...
That is not always true. Some games still have horrible crawling and jaggies at 4k and most certainly need some AA. And of course the size of the monitor matters too.
 
lee0539 said:
Well you don't need to run AA when you have 4k resolution. There won't be too much to smooth out. And right now games on ultra with 4k no AA use more than 6 gb as well as 3440 X1440 with AA. There was a post showing this in multiple games. You can also see youtube videos of frametimes and the constant drops when vram is insufficient. Just because the games you play don't go over 6gb doesn't mean no games does and that future games won't.
Click to expand...

Ugh. Seriously? You absolutely still need AA in 4K. You don't understand how things work, and you obviously don't have 4K.

Oh hey everybody! Future games will require more VRAM!
 
Brahmzy said:
Ugh. Seriously? You absolutely still need AA in 4K. You don't understand how things work, and you obviously don't have 4K.

Oh hey everybody! Future games will require more VRAM!
Click to expand...

I don't have 4k and I already told you what resolution I am running and it is lower than 4k. Yet I hit over 6gb with titan x without all the bells and whistles running at 50-60 fps stable. So if 4k requires AA then how will that not use more than 6gb when it is a higher resolution especially currently in sli without dx12 when you can push graphics even further?
 
lee0539 said:
Well you don't need to run AA when you have 4k resolution. There won't be too much to smooth out. And right now games on ultra with 4k no AA use more than 6 gb as well as 3440 X1440 with AA. There was a post showing this in multiple games. You can also see youtube videos of frametimes and the constant drops when vram is insufficient. Just because the games you play don't go over 6gb doesn't mean no games does and that future games won't.
Click to expand...

You'll still need AA, mind you FXAA or SMAA are more than adequate at that resolution. The size of the image is large enough that you don't end up with the same blurring artifacts that you have at 1080.
 
pandora's box said:
The way I look at it: I plan on keeping my Titan X's for at least 2 years. If we look back 2 years ago we had 3GB cards being mainstream and 4GB becoming the new standard. Fast forward to today and 4GB is mainstream and barely enough. Makes you wonder what next year will bring in terms of VRAM requirements.
Click to expand...
lol 2 years.
 
Well, I've had my 3 Titans for about 2 years now so I'm about ready to upgrade. I need the HDMI 2.0 support anyways as I'm running a 4k HDMI 2.0 display so I'm only getting 4:2:0 output @ 4k/60Hz. Now I just need to decide between the 390x and 980Ti. I'm a little pissed right now it seems that Nvidia has neglected Kepler.
 
lee0539 said:
okay wtf no game is going to run decently at those resolutions. and those "requirements" are never correct. i have hit almost 6 gb in several games at my 3440X1440 resolution so yes vram usuage may go up to higher since consoles can handle around 6 gb as well as they have 8 gb and use a a gig or so of that amount. Then you give pc ultra textures, AA, and higher resolution above 3440X1440 and the console port on a pc can use more than 6 gb. at 1080p or 1440 non ultrawide will probably unlikey go above 6 gb.

Basically titan x is for anyone above 1440 @ 16:9 and 980 ti is for anyone at or below 1440 @16:9
Click to expand...

But you're only compensating for average console ports at lower than 4K resolutions.
A good console port optimized for PC will exceed 6-8GB in 4K as you saw in GTA V.

Now that 4K can be had for cheaper than 3440x1440, more people will start to play at 4K resolutions, so they need to compensate accordingly.
 
Last edited:
Gotta love the elitist view in this thread. News flash for you: You are a minority when it comes to 4k and maxing games out. MAJORITY of people play on low/mid end systems, with the likes of 650TI cards and so on. If companies sold nothing but 980/Titan/290x cards then they would go out of business.

Some of you are way out of touch with reality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top