Geforce GTX Titan - First Pics & True Specs

the ONLY WAY I could even justify the price is if this card could overclock to 690 speeds, or faster.

It looks like Nvidia is keeping it low clocked, if they can hit 1150 on stock volts....imagine a 1250-1300 part could do.
 
WorldExclusive said:
If AMD leaves the desktop gpu market, either Intel will buy out their gpu division or desktop gaming will die altogether.
No way Nvidia can carry on by itself. Why do you think Intel helps AMD now and then?

You need two to tango.
Click to expand...

your spouting poo. nvidia could carry on easy by itself. you would have intel and there onboard gpu's for the low end market and nvidia for the mid range to high end market.
 
Filter said:
your spouting poo. nvidia could carry on easy by itself. you would have intel and there onboard gpu's for the low end market and nvidia for the mid range to high end market.
Click to expand...

One player in each market?

Yeah, that's great economics. :rolleyes:
 
I, for one, am looking forward to this card very much. The tweaking capability, the raw power, and yes, even the performance compared to current flagship cards. It all impresses me.

I think it mostly impresses me because I am not comparing it directly to dual gpu solutions. For me, and this is just personal preference, but I have zero interest in multiple gpu setups. Call it a bad taste from previous experience, call it not fully embracing the hobby, call it whatever you want, but the day I saw my buddy disable his second gpu on his 590 to be able to play a game, that was it for me. My previous experience with SLI and crossfire setups always felt like a little less than I should have gotten.

Now, I have been in the market for a 6-700 dollar gpu to pull me out of the dark ages, and although a 7970 or a 680 would definitely be a nice upgrade, Titan is at the right point, performance-wise to really feel worth it to me.

Also, dunno if I am nuts or what, but even at only 35% increase over the 680, it feels like a lot more proportional of a price difference compared to the price/performance difference between the 670 and the 680.

Looking forward to getting my hands on one.
 
PCduster said:
I, for one, am looking forward to this card very much. The tweaking capability, the raw power, and yes, even the performance compared to current flagship cards. It all impresses me.

I think it mostly impresses me because I am not comparing it directly to dual gpu solutions. For me, and this is just personal preference, but I have zero interest in multiple gpu setups. Call it a bad taste from previous experience, call it not fully embracing the hobby, call it whatever you want, but the day I saw my buddy disable his second gpu on his 590 to be able to play a game, that was it for me. My previous experience with SLI and crossfire setups always felt like a little less than I should have gotten.

Now, I have been in the market for a 6-700 dollar gpu to pull me out of the dark ages, and although a 7970 or a 680 would definitely be a nice upgrade, Titan is at the right point, performance-wise to really feel worth it to me.

Also, dunno if I am nuts or what, but even at only 35% increase over the 680, it feels like a lot more proportional of a price difference compared to the price/performance difference between the 670 and the 680.

Looking forward to getting my hands on one.
Click to expand...

I mean, I agree with the whole preferring 1 GPU. But I do own multiple 680s, so I have to take into account the speed difference. I want to increase my framerate, not decrease it. Thus, I'd be looking at $2000. Now, if it was priced cheaper than a 690, I might pull the switch. Or if it was faster than a 690, the same. Or if there were any games out there that demanded it. I don't have a 4k monitor. I don't have a 3D monitor. And if I was going for computational speed, I'd probably just buy one of their high end cards instead. I'm sure that there will be people who will buy multiple of these. And while my PC won't be as fast, I can deal with only 60 FPS while they run at 100 FPS.
 
From what I've read so far, I really liked how Tom's summed it up:

1. Pay the same $1,000 for a GeForce GTX 690 if you only want one dual-slot card and your case accommodates the long board. It remains the fastest graphics solution we’ve ever tested, so there's no real reason not to favor it over Titan.

2. The Titan isn’t worth $600 more than a Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition. Two of AMD’s cards are going to be faster and cost less. Of course, they’re also distractingly loud when you hit them with a demanding load. Make sure you have room for two dual-slot cards with one vacant space between them. Typically, I frown on such inelegance, but more speed for $200 less could be worth the trade-off in a roomy case.

3. Buy a GeForce GTX Titan when you want the fastest gaming experience possible from a mini-ITX machine like Falcon Northwest’s Tiki or iBuyPower’s Revolt. A 690 isn’t practical due to its length, power requirements, and axial-flow fan.

4. Buy a GeForce GTX Titan if you have a trio of 1920x1080/2560x1440/2560x1600 screens and fully intend to use two or three cards in SLI. In the most demanding titles, two GK110s scale much more linearly than four GK104s (dual GeForce GTX 690s). Three Titan cards are just Ludicrous Gibs!

And as you’ll see in a couple of days, there’s a lot to like about this card’s performance. Our beef is with its stratospheric price tag, which limits the Titan to small form factor gaming boxes and multi-card configurations in ultra-high-end PCs. Most enthusiasts will rightly balk at this card.
Click to expand...
 
Um... I'm a little confused to be honest.

What's the distinction between this Titan and simply a new gen? It appears to me that ~+50% performance is pretty characteristic of a new gen, but the only real difference here is that this thing is priced at $900+. It's also been nearly a year since the GTX 680 launched (Mar 22, 2012) and over a year since the 7970 (Jan 9, 2012). So are we to interpret this as the same gen and twice the cost of a flagship card?...
 
PCduster said:
I, for one, am looking forward to this card very much. The tweaking capability, the raw power, and yes, even the performance compared to current flagship cards. It all impresses me.

I think it mostly impresses me because I am not comparing it directly to dual gpu solutions. For me, and this is just personal preference, but I have zero interest in multiple gpu setups. Call it a bad taste from previous experience, call it not fully embracing the hobby, call it whatever you want, but the day I saw my buddy disable his second gpu on his 590 to be able to play a game, that was it for me. My previous experience with SLI and crossfire setups always felt like a little less than I should have gotten.

Now, I have been in the market for a 6-700 dollar gpu to pull me out of the dark ages, and although a 7970 or a 680 would definitely be a nice upgrade, Titan is at the right point, performance-wise to really feel worth it to me.

Also, dunno if I am nuts or what, but even at only 35% increase over the 680, it feels like a lot more proportional of a price difference compared to the price/performance difference between the 670 and the 680.

Looking forward to getting my hands on one.
Click to expand...

You are nuts, but do what makes you happy. You'll probably also like that it lights up :cool::

nvidia-geforce-titan-20-640x509.jpg
 
Heh, I AM eagerly anticipating those with the funds/balls to drop $2000 on an SLI (and $3000 on Tri-SLI!!) and post some results. Otherwise - just another halo product I can't afford (and even if I could, I still wouldn't get one - let alone two).
 
Intel_Hydralisk said:
Um... I'm a little confused to be honest.

What's the distinction between this Titan and simply a new gen? It appears to me that ~+50% performance is pretty characteristic of a new gen, but the only real difference here is that this thing is priced at $900+. It's also been nearly a year since the GTX 680 launched (Mar 22, 2012) and over a year since the 7970 (Jan 9, 2012). So are we to interpret this as the same gen and twice the cost of a flagship card?...
Click to expand...

That is a good question.

All the comparisons to multi-GPU solutions are just silly. Granted Nvidia's SLI is better than AMD's CFX, but they still come off as being public beta tests, unstable, problems, and never as fluid as a good single GPU solution.

So for me, only single GPU solutions are on the table, and as it stands today, the Titan is by far the fastest single GPU solution out there, and halo models always demand a premium, especially when the competition doesn't have anything to compete with.

Thus far I have only seen rumors about the next gen, who knows when it will actually be out, but when it is it will most certainly perform similarly or better than the Titan, and be cheaper.

It seems to me the only thing the Titan is really competing against at this point is the next generation top end card from nvidia.

So the big question here is when will we see a next generation GTX 780 (or whatever they wind up calling it) part? Well, if it's supposed to be Maxwell based, that supposedly isn't due until 2014.

GK104 is already maxed out, so they can't do much like they could when moving from GF100 to GF110 by enabling the extra cores in moving from the GTX580 to GTX680, so what would a next generation 780 part be? Maybe a streamlined and optimized chip called the GK114? I wouldn't expect MAJOR improvements out of that, as it will still be on the same architecture.

So, I'm starting to wonder if the Titan isn't the best single GPU solution we'll see until Maxwell comes out in 2014.

If you are a multi-gpu hater like myself, you have to ask yourself how much it is worth to have something like the Titan that may not be beaten for a year or more.
 
IMO this card is well worth the money if you want compute performance. It'll be faster then the 690 when it comes to that, and use less power doing so.

Frankly, i'd likely choose a Titan over a 690 anyways. I've personally run two different SLI rigs throughout my rig lineup and i'm not fond of it. While multi-GPU support in most titles these days is way better then it was even a couple years ago; It still blows donkey balls when you have those games that simply won't work with SLI, or just scale bad anyways. Then you're left with a single 680.

And a BIG thing people are forgetting about the 690 is that you've only got 2GB of VRAM. Yes, 4GB is marketed, but this SLI folks. That means you've only really got 2GB. As more and more newer games come out, and if one runs higher resolutions; The 2GB of VRAM that the 690/2 vanilla 680's offer is simply inadequate. The only other option is to build out SLI 4GB 680's, go ATI.. Or get a Titan.

And while two 7970's will be faster those parts use a hell of a lot more power, among a few other distracting points.

The Titan fits perfectly at the $1k price point IMO.
 
Looks like I'll be waiting for some 780gtx cards to come out. Typically I haven't been pleased with upgrading every generation, so I still have my 580's but when I have the money burning a hole in my pocket....

It's getting hard not to grab a couple of 680's just to soothe the itch.
 
oshia86 said:
Looks like I'll be waiting for some 780gtx cards to come out. Typically I haven't been pleased with upgrading every generation, so I still have my 580's but when I have the money burning a hole in my pocket....

It's getting hard not to grab a couple of 680's just to soothe the itch.
Click to expand...

True, but what do we know about the 780's now?

Nvidia was able to give us a nice performance boost going from the 580 to the 680 in large part due to enabling the disabled cores in the 580. There were also some efficiency improvements going from the GF100 to the GF110, but they were much smaller overall.

Nvidia does't have the same leeway with the GTX 680's GK104. It doesn't have any disabled cores. Doing similar efficiency improvements moving to GK114 would produce a lot smaller results than th eGF100 to GF110 move, unless they are able to SIGNIFICANTLY boost clock speeds.

So what that leaves us with is the next major architecture release being Maxwell, and that's not due out until 2014.

The Titan may just be the best thing out there until Maxwell top end video cards hit...
 
TheBuzzer said:
um. i havn't built a 5k pc since p3 800mhz time.
Click to expand...

You should have built AMD systems back then. You would have had the same performance for a lot less money :p

Personally, I've never built a $5k PC from scratch.

If I were to build mine from scratch today, it would probably cost a lot, but I got here piecemeal, upgrading component by component as I saw a weakness arise.
 
Zarathustra[H];1039628360 said:
True, but what do we know about the 780's now?

Nvidia was able to give us a nice performance boost going from the 580 to the 680 in large part due to enabling the disabled cores in the 580. There were also some efficiency improvements going from the GF100 to the GF110, but they were much smaller overall.

Nvidia does't have the same leeway with the GTX 680's GK104. It doesn't have any disabled cores. Doing similar efficiency improvements moving to GK114 would produce a lot smaller results than th eGF100 to GF110 move, unless they are able to SIGNIFICANTLY boost clock speeds.

So what that leaves us with is the next major architecture release being Maxwell, and that's not due out until 2014.

The Titan may just be the best thing out there until Maxwell top end video cards hit...
Click to expand...

Good points. You're really just making some 680's sound better and better.
 
Zarathustra[H];1039628360 said:
The Titan may just be the best thing out there until Maxwell top end video cards hit...
Click to expand...

Nv and AMD moving their releases later in the year, shows they both got great performance and efficiency from this gen.
But fortunately, Nv still had another chip like the GK110 brewing. AMD didn't, but we can see a cheaper official 7990 though.
 
The hell with it...I'm buying 2....

Built my rig back in April 2011.....Gaming on my Dell 30", the 580's have been great, but I have to dial it down in the settings more and more with some of the newest games now...This is what happens to most of us on this forum who are [H].....

We are mostly enthusiast's and love the bleeding edge.... If you break it down, ya , 2 of these cards on launch will will be bloated $500-$600 over it's actual value......BUT... to me, the extra $$ I spend is worth it as I will have the newest and best tech....
 
$1,000? No. I'll stick with my GTX 680 4GB until the price comes down to a more reasonable level.
 
Filter said:
your spouting poo. nvidia could carry on easy by itself. you would have intel and there onboard gpu's for the low end market and nvidia for the mid range to high end market.
Click to expand...

His spouting is doing what now? One player in a market = bad ;).
 
I'm sorry, I couldn't read through the whole thread... can someone give me the lowdown on this thing?

Is it better than what the 780's are supposed to be?

What in the hell makes this thing worth $1k? It's not dual PCB from the quick I got at it (or is it?)...

...and if it's their next "flagship", then where are the 780s? I thought that was to be their next flagship.

Sorry, I'm a little lost about this thing.
 
v0rtic3s said:
I'm sorry, I couldn't read through the whole thread... can someone give me the lowdown on this thing?

Is it better than what the 780's are supposed to be?

What in the hell makes this thing worth $1k? It's not dual PCB from the quick I got at it (or is it?)...

...and if it's their next "flagship", then where are the 780s? I thought that was to be their next flagship.

Sorry, I'm a little lost about this thing.
Click to expand...

Titan is:
Single GPU, Single PCB, Extreme Fast, Extremely Unaffordable

It'll sell. :D
 
v0rtic3s said:
Is it better than what the 780's are supposed to be?
Click to expand...

Problem is, we don't know what the 780's are going to be at this point.

The info that is out there is all rumor, and much of it is pointing to what looks an awful lot like this titan, so the rumor mill probably just got the name confused on that one.

If a 780 comes out any time soon, it will probably be a respun GK114, with upped clock frequencies, but remember the GK104 does not have the disabled cores the 580's GF100 had, so they will likely gain less than when going from 580 to 680...

If I had to wager a guess, this will be the fastest single GPU until high end Maxwell parts come out in 2014, but again, it's only a guess.
 
Zarathustra[H];1039628831 said:
remember the GK104 does not have the disabled cores the 580's GF100 had, so they will likely gain less than when going from 580 to 680...
Click to expand...

You mean 480 to 580, not 580 to 680. GF100 was the 480.
 
Zarathustra[H];1039628831 said:
Problem is, we don't know what the 780's are going to be at this point.

The info that is out there is all rumor, and much of it is pointing to what looks an awful lot like this titan, so the rumor mill probably just got the name confused on that one.

If a 780 comes out any time soon, it will probably be a respun GK114, with upped clock frequencies, but remember the GK104 does not have the disabled cores the 580's GF100 had, so they will likely gain less than when going from 580 to 680...

If I had to wager a guess, this will be the fastest single GPU until high end Maxwell parts come out in 2014, but again, it's only a guess.
Click to expand...


I'd bet on that too.
 
To follow up on what I was talking about earlier, as far as the price/performance difference between a 670 and a 680, you can find a GTX 670 for $360. A 680 can go for $460.

670 -> 680

Price increase 27%.

Performance increase 5-10%.


680 -> Titan

Price increase of 109%

Performance increase: 40%+


If you count the difference between 670 and 680 as 10%(upper end) and the difference between the 680 and the Titan at 40%(lower end, even used by someone who called it a "turd"), both examples are pretty similar. In actuality, though, the difference between the 670 and 680, even in SLI, tend to be pretty insignificant. 670 or 680 to Titan, though? Noticeable difference.

I only point this out because there are a lot of 680s in the sigs in this thread. Not to say that is a bad thing, just saying that they are popular cards, even if they aren't the absolute best bang for the buck. But would this hobby be anywhere near as fun if you only did that which was fiscally sound?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top