Geforce GTX Titan - First Pics & True Specs

PCduster said:
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?
Click to expand...

you have to keep in mind this card can do things a tesla card can and a 680/690 cant.
can not just look at this card as a gaming only card.
 
PCduster said:
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?
Click to expand...

Your logic will fall flat in the face of jealous envy. :(
 
PCduster said:
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?
Click to expand...

Good post. I'd like to see benchmarks with the card and different cpu's. That's what I really want to see.
 
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...

Thanks for the response.

So, basically, this is a completely different "alien tech super computer" GPU that has absolutely nothing to do with the 780... it's like a "standalone/one-off" release kind of thing?

Is the Titan based of a different architecture that makes it different from what the 680s are and 780s will be?

I didn't even see this thing coming. Maybe I've been out of the hardware loop too long. Not totally sure that I understand nVidia releasing this thing or why, as opposed to the "actual" next gen of the current architecture.

Especially for $1k? I mean, the specs look insane, but I'm not sure I "get it", or trust it would be worth it.

I'm still running a 580 since it maxes everything without a problem. I never even bothered moving up to the 680, as I saw no real massive performance increase in all the reviews that made it worth it. As someone else said, the tech today is not really keeping up with the hardware being released. Maybe best I just wait for the 780 instead of moving up to a 680 at any point... never mind the Titan.
 
v0rtic3s said:
I'm still running a 580 since it maxes everything without a problem.
Click to expand...

No.

I'm sitting on a 580 as well but please don't lie to yourself or others with fraudulent claims. (Unless you run at 1024x768.)

As for the titan... I really want one but can't justify the price for it and can't wait to see maxwell in 2014. Hopefully the 580 continues to tide me over (medium-high on most newer games) till then but the urge grows!

Titan + Watercooling would be a huge boost from a 580 but 1100+ for a gpu that realistically still might not be able to max everything at 1440p+ is absurd imo.
 
v0rtic3s said:
removed.
Click to expand...
and how stupid do you think we are? all it takes is one good eye to look at reviews to see there is no way you run everything maxed out. unless you consider 30 fps and below playable. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Zarathustra[H];1039628310 said:
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.
Click to expand...

I have run SLI for over 5 years without any problems, what am I doing wrong? ;)
 
Mchart said:
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.
Click to expand...

Please list those games BY NAME. I have two 680s in SLI so I will just avoid them.
 
///AMG said:
^^ haha yea. I am running a 7970 and it doesnt max many games at 1440p.
Click to expand...

Ohh rly? I doubt it. I 'tried" that for a few days till i got a 2nd 7970. Try playing Farcry 3 and now Crysis 3. Hell even Hard reset I cant max every setting at 1440p with 1 card. I'm sure there are others that will struggle at 1440p maxed out.
 
Skakruk said:
Well the first thing you're 'doing wrong' is being immune to microstutter. You're very lucky.
Click to expand...
and claiming no problems is simply not true. there is zero chance that he can run sli for 5 years and not have issues at some point. its like the people that say they have never had a driver issue ever. it is just nonsense and selective memory.
 
cannondale06 said:
and claiming no problems is simply not true. there is zero chance that he can run sli for 5 years and not have issues at some point. its like the people that say they have never had a driver issue ever. it is just nonsense and selective memory.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

For my two different systems (And each one I ran for about a year with SLI) it was a constant hassle with SLI. Every time a new game would come out i'd have to deal with figuring out how to get it to work. Some games never worked, or the scaling was so bad it wasn't even worth it. Not to mention the extra power consumption, noise, and room it took in the case.

Now, I know things have gotten easier since I last dealt with multi-GPU setups, but there are still the fundamental issues present.

I'm not outright bashing SLI. I used it and obviously had a need for it. There is a reason I was VERY happy to upgrade to the single better GPU each time though, and at this point i'd never do it again unless I had to.
 
rinaldo00 said:
Please list those games BY NAME. I have two 680s in SLI so I will just avoid them.
Click to expand...

While not a game, Adobe Premiere Pro + Windows 8 + SLI does not work. I have to disable SLI so I can see the video. Maybe it's just the latest drivers, I don't know.
 
v0rtic3s said:
removed
Click to expand...




You CANNOT run EVERY GAME on MAXIMUM at 1080p. It's not possible.

Let's go over this.

You can't run Far Cry 3 maximum and maintain anywhere close to 60 fps you're more in the ballpark of 30 fps at 1080p.

You can't run Crysis 3 "near max" (which is not MAXIMUM) at 1080p or even close to max and maintain anything close to 60 fps let alone a stable fps.

You can't run Assassin's Creed 3 on maximum and maintain a solid framerate that even averages out to 60 fps.

You cannot run Metro 2033 on maximum in dx11 mode without having absymal performance.

You cannot play battlefield 3 maximum without significant slowdowns in many areas.

You cannot play Witcher 2 maximum (disable ubersampling and you have a case but that wouldn't be maximum then would it) and approach 60 fps.

You cannot even play Crysis 1 at maximum and maintain 60 fps.

You having sub-par or just flat out wrong 'standards' for MAXIMUM and then claiming your 'view' is correct when no one agrees with you is absurd. Then you calling others "jerk offs" because you can't handle having your shit called out is equally absurd.

Anyone who uses a GTX 580 besides you knows they can't max everything let alone nearly everything at 1080p.

The only one here with an attitude is you. You're being defensive about lies that anyone on the planet could and would call you out on (and multiple in this very thread did). Instead of at least trying to back up your claims, you go around claiming everyone with a different 'opinion' than you are quack psychologists and have 'bad' attitudes.


For reference in case you think it's my system that's sub par:

i5 2500k @ 4.5 ghz
GTX 580 @ 950/2400
12 GB 1600 mhz 7-8-7-24
Gigabyte P67-UD5-B3


Now, please, get real and stop lying to yourself. You only make yourself look like a fool.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
add Hitman Absolution, Clear Sky, Cryostasis, Sleeping Dogs, and Arma 2 to that list. and if 60fps is the main goal then they are some others too.
 
nice way to allow somebody to derail this thread

i can't believe they're charging a grand for this card. when was the last time nvidia released a card at this price? and stop yourself with the "well it's a compute card!!!". what would you guess as to the percentage of people buying this card for gaming only? over 90%? I bet there are more people who purchase 7970's for bitcoin mining than there are people who are going to buy a Titan for FP64

don't allow this company to fool you into thinking this card is "worth" $999 USD. just like the GTX 680 wasn't worth $499 at launch (granted, the 680 was at least more near it's actual value than the Titan is.

and yes I will have a hearty laugh at people who buy this card for gaming instead of a 690

just because you can afford to waste your money, doesn't mean you should. I can afford a Titan, it doesn't mean I would waste my money on it
 
I would buy this over a 690 in heartbeat. of course I cant justify spending that much on any card anyway so it does not really matter.
 
cannondale06 said:
and how stupid do you think we are? all it takes is one good eye to look at reviews to see there is no way you run everything maxed out. unless you consider 30 fps and below playable. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Maybe he does? 30fps is playable. It may not be ideal but it is playable. Look at most console titles.
 
I think I'll stick with my original plan of two 670 2gig cards. Seems like more bang for my buck to drive a 27" monitor.
 
Nice looking card. It is also nice that they have allowed us to buy some of their defective HPC-oriented GPUs. However, the specs and pricing as compared to my current 680 SLI setup just don't warrant the upgrade. I have no doubt in my mind that this pricing is primarily due to the fact that AMD can't get their $#!% together.
 
cannondale06 said:
and claiming no problems is simply not true. there is zero chance that he can run sli for 5 years and not have issues at some point. its like the people that say they have never had a driver issue ever. it is just nonsense and selective memory.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I've been running SLI for about that long as well (8800 days was my first SLI setup) and never really experienced a problem beyond hitting vram limits with my 570 tri-sli, and I've had a lot of setups up to an including the 690. I also don't pick up new titles right away, sometimes not even until a year or so after its been released. I STILL don't have BF3, Hitman, etc. that everyone talks about right now. For me it works great as the drivers have already been fixed for everything by the time I pick sup a new game. The only things I play that aren't supported I have to play in openGL mode anyway like the old C&C games, etc. MS I have only seen with AMD cards and I am pretty damn sensitive to it, but I will also compromise more settings to allow vsync to work than some people.
 
LigTasm said:
I also don't pick up new titles right away, sometimes not even until a year or so after its been released. I STILL don't have BF3, Hitman, etc. that everyone talks about right now. For me it works great as the drivers have already been fixed for everything by the time I pick sup a new game.
Click to expand...

That right there is the majority of why you have experienced so few issues. That year or so after launch of a game can be rough on single gpu solutions, and even more so for multi gpu solutions. By similar logic you could almost eliminate all possible issues with drivers and save a ton of money by using a mid range card to play a game 5 to 10 years after it is released.

But naturally you won't get wet if you don't go out while it is raining, lol. It just sucks how much it rains with multi gpu.
 
Reality said:
nice way to allow somebody to derail this thread

i can't believe they're charging a grand for this card. when was the last time nvidia released a card at this price? and stop yourself with the "well it's a compute card!!!". what would you guess as to the percentage of people buying this card for gaming only? over 90%? I bet there are more people who purchase 7970's for bitcoin mining than there are people who are going to buy a Titan for FP64

don't allow this company to fool you into thinking this card is "worth" $999 USD. just like the GTX 680 wasn't worth $499 at launch (granted, the 680 was at least more near it's actual value than the Titan is.

and yes I will have a hearty laugh at people who buy this card for gaming instead of a 690

just because you can afford to waste your money, doesn't mean you should. I can afford a Titan, it doesn't mean I would waste my money on it
Click to expand...

Value is not absolute, it is a perceived concept and is going to be different for every person.

That being said, this is a halo card, and pricing NEVER scales linearly with performance, meaning, a card that is 50% faster, is usually going to cost WAY more than 50% more.

Diminishing returns and all that.

But lets look at pricing history for a moment (and factor in inflation as well)

Code: 
Year	Model				Launch price	Launch Price, 2013 Dollars
2000	Geforce 2 Ultra			$500 		$666.50 
2001	Geforce 3 TI 500		$350 		$453.95 
2003	Geforce 4 TI 4600		$400 		$499.20 
2003	Geforce 5950 Ultra		$500 		$624.00 
2004	Geforce 6800 Ultra Extreme	$540 		$656.10 
2006	Geforce 7900 GTX		$500 		$569.50 
2007	Geforce 8800 Ultra		$850 		$940.95 
2008	Geforce GTX 280			$650 		$692.90 
2009	Geforce GTX 285			$400 		$428.00 
2010	Geforce GTX480			$500 		$526.50 
2010	Geforce GTX580			$500 		$526.50 
2012	Geforce GTX680			$500 		$500.00 
2013 Geforce GTX Titan			$999		$999.00

8491487789_a36258bc50_o.jpg


So, historically, the Titan is Nvidia's highest priced halo card at launch, but only by a rather small margin above the 8800 Ultra.

What they have in common is that they both came out at a time when AMD/ATI don't have anything to compete with. In the case of the 8800 Ultra the price dropped rather fast, as AMD caught up. We'll have to see what happens this time around.

Nvidia probably won't have a faster GPU faster until Maxwell hits in 2014.

As far as AMD goes, I'm not sure about their roadmap.

This price may stick around for a while...
 
I can't wait till tomorrow to see some real world performance results. If this thing will reach 690 levels after overclocking then it's a winner in my view.
 
Well here is how I look at the situation and why I'm going to be looking at multiple water cooled Titans.

Like some of the other posters here, I've been doing 2-way sli since the 8800 GTX has been around. I haven't had any specific SLI issues per-se. Mostly a new game comes out, takes a week and new drivers support it and I'm happy. That's to be expected and I don't believe unreasonable.

Now I'm running 4 - GTX 670 4GB cards. I game between a 8060x1600 resolution, and some single screen gaming as well. The 670's play BF3, Skyrim, Borderlands 2, WoW (not a great example I know) very well (we are talking maximum quality settings, but maybe not maximum AA '2x or 4x'). To me that's very good considering the resolution I'm pushing.

Now if these cards are within 10% of one 690, I'll be all over that. I can only stuff two 690's in a system, but I can stuff 3 (or hopefully 4) Titans in one system and blow away two 690's for the goals I'm trying to accomplish. Plus the fact that this will have 50% memory bandwidth (which is holding me back now) this is win-win for me. Yes the price is absurd, but I knew that going in with 3 - 30" monitors. When Ivy Bridge - E shows up, I'll get more CPU behind this and the gaming will be amazing.

Is this for everyone? Absolutely not. I've been reading sites and some people are guessing that Titan will still be the fastest single card even past the 700 series. Who really knows? But I'm seriously considering them and waiting on the actual benchmarks to drop.

It is an interesting time for GPU fans for sure.
 
clayton006 said:
Well here is how I look at the situation and why I'm going to be looking at multiple water cooled Titans.

Like some of the other posters here, I've been doing 2-way sli since the 8800 GTX has been around. I haven't had any specific SLI issues per-se. Mostly a new game comes out, takes a week and new drivers support it and I'm happy. That's to be expected and I don't believe unreasonable.

Now I'm running 4 - GTX 670 4GB cards. I game between a 8060x1600 resolution, and some single screen gaming as well. The 670's play BF3, Skyrim, Borderlands 2, WoW (not a great example I know) very well (we are talking maximum quality settings, but maybe not maximum AA '2x or 4x'). To me that's very good considering the resolution I'm pushing.

Now if these cards are within 10% of one 690, I'll be all over that. I can only stuff two 690's in a system, but I can stuff 3 (or hopefully 4) Titans in one system and blow away two 690's for the goals I'm trying to accomplish. Plus the fact that this will have 50% memory bandwidth (which is holding me back now) this is win-win for me. Yes the price is absurd, but I knew that going in with 3 - 30" monitors. When Ivy Bridge - E shows up, I'll get more CPU behind this and the gaming will be amazing.

Is this for everyone? Absolutely not. I've been reading sites and some people are guessing that Titan will still be the fastest single card even past the 700 series. Who really knows? But I'm seriously considering them and waiting on the actual benchmarks to drop.

It is an interesting time for GPU fans for sure.
Click to expand...
8060x1600??? You sir, are the user the Titan is aimed towards.
Tri-SLI would be the best setup. For Nvidia to send each reviewer three, shows they must scale pretty well.

The OC potential to clock up to a 690 looks promising also.
Having three theorical 690's in SLI is something of Pandas riding Unicorns.
 
WorldExclusive said:
8060x1600??? You sir, are the user the Titan is aimed towards.
Tri-SLI would be the best setup. For Nvidia to send each reviewer three, shows they must scale pretty well.

The OC potential to clock up to a 690 looks promising also.
Having three theorical 690's in SLI is something of Pandas riding Unicorns.
Click to expand...

Yeah I'm surprised that they didn't do any 4-way testing. It may be something like the 670 where 3-way was the max until a driver update. I'm hoping they scale well up to 4-way.

It would be nice to do more than two 690's that would be like hex-sli which doesn't exist. I doubt it would scale very well, but it would be neat if it were possible.

I think I'm going to water on these for the OC potential. As it appears that the boost is closely tied to the temp now, having these on water would scream!
 
If this card can overclock and surpass a maxed out 690 I may bite. Actually it would have to surpass 2 680's at 1300mhz for me to buy it.
 
Mchart said:
Exactly.

For my two different systems (And each one I ran for about a year with SLI) it was a constant hassle with SLI. Every time a new game would come out i'd have to deal with figuring out how to get it to work.
Click to expand...
Well, that is the big difference, I ran my GTX 8800 Ultras for 5 years until they died and after a year or so I refused to pay full price for new games and only bought games at 50-75% off. By then driver issuses were resoived.
 
Last edited:
cannondale06 said:
and claiming no problems is simply not true. there is zero chance that he can run sli for 5 years and not have issues at some point. its like the people that say they have never had a driver issue ever. it is just nonsense and selective memory.
Click to expand...

Well, believe what you wish.

I ran my GTX 8800 Ultras for 5 years until they died and after a year or so I refused to pay full price for new games and only bought games at 50-75% off. By then driver issuses were resoived. They were water cooled, never over clocked, and never gave me problems.
 
rinaldo00 said:
Well, believe what you wish.

I ran my GTX 8800 Ultras for 5 years until they died and after a year or so I refused to pay full price for new games and only bought games at 50-75% off. By then driver issuses were resoived. They were water cooled, never over clocked, and never gave me problems.
Click to expand...

I think the big thing here is that absolutes in either direction and saying "it's not possible" is a premature assumption. There are people with good experiences, and people with bad. YMMV...

Let's bring on the Titan benchmarks already.... :)
 
clayton006 said:
I think the big thing here is that absolutes in either direction and saying "it's not possible" is a premature assumption. There are people with good experiences, and people with bad. YMMV...

Let's bring on the Titan benchmarks already.... :)
Click to expand...

This, I have a lot saved up for upgrades and nothing yet that makes me go WOW! I haven't built a system from the ground up in 3 friggin years, and the only things I really upgraded are SSDs and 5870 to 7970. I need this to be faster than a 690 so I can finally get myself to build a new system.
 
I wonder how much price-gouging we're going to see...I wouldn't be surprised to see $1200 Titan cards

since this is now officially NOT a limited run, can we expect price cuts on the 680?
 
clayton006 said:
Yeah I'm surprised that they didn't do any 4-way testing. It may be something like the 670 where 3-way was the max until a driver update. I'm hoping they scale well up to 4-way.
Click to expand...

How much PCIe bandwidth does each Titan use? I'm wondering if there's sufficient for quad Titans?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top