Geforce GTX Titan - First Pics & True Specs

///AMG said:
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.
Click to expand...

I never build a system from the ground.

Every system I build gets most of its parts from its predecessor.

This way I get to upgrade frequently without completely breaking the bank :p

CPU /Mobo usually gets replaced once every 1-2 years, Video card(s) once a year or so.

Everything else tends to last longer.
 
Whew at least I know my three GTX 680 4G's are good to go for a year............Note to Nvidia: Please keep things as they are until 2014, then you can do newer stuff, lol, let me at least keep these beasts for a year before you degrade the value of my most recent outlay of cash. Thanks.
 
Zarathustra[H];1039632381 said:
I never build a system from the ground.

Every system I build gets most of its parts from its predecessor.

This way I get to upgrade frequently without completely breaking the bank :p

CPU /Mobo usually gets replaced once every 1-2 years, Video card(s) once a year or so.

Everything else tends to last longer.
Click to expand...

For me my cycle is brand new build every 2 years, incremental update in between if needed. Eg if enough games come out that my GPU cant run it well at acceptable levels then I will upgrade. I tend to give my last build to my father, and his computer becomes a HTPC. I like building from the ground up because it keeps it fresh and exciting.
 
i have a hard time believing the titan will make much sales on the market. most, if not all enthusiasts (with a real budget like normal people), have already exhausted their wallets on multiple high end GTX600's/HD7000's in their rigs, and is willing to go through the trouble to sell their products for a fraction of what they paid for, in order to buy titan(s). if anything, titan will probably hurt their own market on the GTX690's. because if titan lingers around a 10% performance of the GTX690 for a similar price, the GTX690 is doomed, for those that are even considering that much power.
 
TFchris said:
i have a hard time believing the titan will make much sales on the market. most, if not all enthusiasts (with a real budget like normal people), have already exhausted their wallets on multiple high end GTX600's/HD7000's in their rigs, and is willing to go through the trouble to sell their products for a fraction of what they paid for, in order to buy titan(s). if anything, titan will probably hurt their own market on the GTX690's. because if titan lingers around a 10% performance of the GTX690 for a similar price, the GTX690 is doomed, for those that are even considering that much power.
Click to expand...

I agree. Just for fun I went on Newegg to see feedback on some 690s, and there were a lot of feedback from Jan-Feb already of new purchases, I doubt many of those new owners will be buying Titans. Perhaps a few.

But if they don't sell well, nVidia can drop the price. They will have to.

And likewise, I think a lot of people who bought a 480 skipped the 580 and went with the 600 series instead. Most people tend to skip a product cycle.

I know the Titan won't beat the 690 in many cases. That is the reason nVidia is pushing GPU Boost 2.0 and only on the Titan, because they want the people who were not happy with the restrictions on the 600 series to upgrade to the Titan.
 
Last edited:
RamonGTP said:
There are lots of people who simply want a more powerful single GPU card
Click to expand...

There are, but that is a very specific and a smaller group.

A $500 graphics card is one thing, a $1000 graphics card is another. Its like with movies. A film rated PG and a film rated R. Once you rate a film R, your market target is split and you've cut off a large portion.
 
Which is perfect as far as nVidia is concerned. Clearly they aren't aiming this card towards the masses. As stated several times in this thread. Whatever they produce, they'll sell.
 
I think the the whole targeting SFF builders will make a pretty good sales impact. I'm a little disappointed in my GTX 680/Sg08 rig, and would like some more oomph to drive a 2560x1440 monitor or go 120hz. I'm leaning towards buying one.

I'd say the SFF market is willing to pay premiums to get the best performance/heat/size ratios (at least I am). The negative really holding me back is uncertainty on GTX 780 performance. I was burned a bit on the small variance on early adopting a 680 and then having the 670 be basically the same. Would be annoying to see that happen again, especially with a $1k to $500 gap.


To clarify I was never interested in the 690 due to the cooling solution, I need a blower cooler for the SG08. I didn't want to fabricate a vent for it like that other Sg08 user here on [H].
 
oh i'm sure they will sell, just probably not as much as they would want. i wouldn't be surprised if after 2-3 months after release, there would be an entire warehouse full of them left to be sold.

nvidia is trying to please their supporters/enthusiasts, which is great, but financially, i'd presume they'll take a hit on the wallet.
 
they sort of conditioned us with the $1000 690 so I guess they figured why not put the Titan at that price. at the way things are going we might see a Titan 2 in about 6 months with a fully functional GK110 chip and even higher price tag.
 
I gotta say I may really have a sickness..... I have absolutely no need for this card, but if I find one in stock, I'll be ordering it..:)
 
I don't NEED this card.

With my 680 I can play most games just fine at medium settings on my 2560x1600 monitor.

Thing is, I don't want SLI or CFX. They always cause problems, and even when they work, are not as smooth as a single GPU solution, and they DO add input lag, as this OLD review picture from a competing website illustrates very well:

7125601965_776096cd0b_o.gif


I have no interest in AFR at all. Now if SFR were more commonly implemented, I wouldn't mind multi-gpu as much, but it just isn't, cause it doesn't scale as well, and the sheep will take higher absolute frame rates, with more input lag over real, relatively lag free framerates.

So I want to upgrade from my GTX680. I want better frame rates, and the ability to raise the quality in games on my 2560x1600 monitor. This is the only card that can do that, without forcing me into AFR hell.

$1000 IS a bit steep, but if I sell my GTX680 to pay for part of it, it's less of a hit.
 
Rational said:
I dunno, I want it, but I won't buy it, because the thing that keeps me interested in hobbies is wanting things. I want, to want. The disease /is/ the hobby!
Click to expand...

I also want it but won't buy it...main reason being that I also want other toys like possibly Panasonic's new 60" 2013 ZT series plasma which will give me more tangible benefits then the Titan...so it's about choosing which [H] toy I want more
 
Oh, and for the guy asking about it not being a limited production run:

NVIDIA hasn’t gone into depth for launch quantities, but they did specifically shoot down the 10,000 card rumor; this won’t be a limited run product and we don’t have any reason at this time to believe this will be much different from the GTX 690’s launch (tight at first, but available and increasingly plentiful).
Click to expand...
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6760/nvidias-geforce-gtx-titan-part-1/2
 
Zarathustra[H];1039632642 said:
and they DO add input lag,
Click to expand...

I also consider user input lag as one of the factors.
Everyone has different reaction times.

Reaction test:
http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/

As you can see, we are slower than any hardware setup.
Someone can have a 1ms or 120Hz monitor and a single gpu, but if their reactions are slow, the hardware benefits are reduced somewhat.
 
WorldExclusive said:
I also consider user input lag as one of the factors.
Everyone has different reaction times.
Click to expand...

That is true, but it is something that a person gets used to. For example, a person will generally score the same on that test. Hardware, on the other hand, can fluctuate as the game demands more and that becomes a lot more noticeable to someone compared to something they have always dealt with.

A car that consistently pulls to the left is a lot less noticeable than one that is a bit more squirrelly and pulls somewhat randomly in either direction.
 
Zarathustra[H];1039630942 said:
snip
Click to expand...

you forgot to mention that nvidia did not have a card in their lineup that beat the 8800 ultra at that time, which made the 8800 ultra much more appealing , that can't be said now. a 690 is cheaper and faster
 
PCduster said:
That is true, but it is something that a person gets used to. For example, a person will generally score the same on that test. Hardware, on the other hand, can fluctuate as the game demands more and that becomes a lot more noticeable to someone compared to something they have always dealt with.

A car that consistently pulls to the left is a lot less noticeable than one that is a bit more squirrelly and pulls somewhat randomly in either direction.
Click to expand...

Interesting. The score does avg them same.
Very well said.

Crosshairs said:
# 82 on that..not sure if thats good or bad....

edit: just got a 71
Click to expand...

I would say you have a bionic nervous system.
 
Zarathustra[H];1039632642 said:
I don't NEED this card.

With my 680 I can play most games just fine at medium settings on my 2560x1600 monitor.

Thing is, I don't want SLI or CFX. They always cause problems, and even when they work, are not as smooth as a single GPU solution, and they DO add input lag, as this OLD review picture from a competing website illustrates very well:
Click to expand...

Try setting a framerate cap to 59. You won't see any input lag and everything will be very smooth. I'm loving tri-fire ever since I found out about that framerate cap. I would even use it with a single card.

Check out this article, this is what got my to finally give the framerate cap a fair chance. I found out about the 59 fps part from a forum member.

WorldExclusive said:
I also consider user input lag as one of the factors.
Everyone has different reaction times.

Reaction test:
http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/

As you can see, we are slower than any hardware setup.
Someone can have a 1ms or 120Hz monitor and a single gpu, but if their reactions are slow, the hardware benefits are reduced somewhat.
Click to expand...

I did horribly on that test and I'm still very sensitive to input lag. I've had a couple of displays with a bit of input lag (HP LP2465 and Acer GD235hz). I don't know how to describe it but it feels like you're chasing people around with the crosshair in an fps.

A few ms of input lag can sure be noticeable.
 
Last edited:
Skakruk said:
In my experience, the 59/58 or 118/119 cap causes regular minor hitching in 80% of games. UT2004 is a good example, because the engine is so smooth to begin with.
Click to expand...

That shouldn't happen. I wouldn't be surprised if it were an issue in a game or two but 80%? No, its never even caused me an issue.
 
BababooeyHTJ said:
I did horribly on that test and I'm still very sensitive to input lag. I've had a couple of displays with a bit of input lag (HP LP2465 and Acer GD235hz). I don't know how to describe it but it feels like you're chasing people around with the crosshair in an fps.

A few ms of input lag can sure be noticeable.
Click to expand...

The faster the framerate, the more dangerous I become in FPS.
So I try to reach 60fps+ whenever possible.

I may try one of those IPS 100MHz Catleap monitors, and OC it using the new Nv driver to 120Hz(if possible).
 
Skakruk said:
Another example is Skyrim.

I've seen this confirmed by others.
Click to expand...

Odd, thats an engine that people have been using various framerate caps on forever now.

WorldExclusive said:
The faster the framerate, the more dangerous I become in FPS.
So I try to reach 60fps+ whenever possible.
Click to expand...

It doesn't make a difference with a 60hz display. Unless you're playing a game like Quake 3 where having a super high framerate has effects on the engine. There isn't a good reason to not cap most games imo. Its makes the experience much smoother. If I forget to launch Radeon pro Borderlands 2 is a stutterfest. As soon as I set up the framerate cap the game is smooth as silk.
 
WorldExclusive said:
I also consider user input lag as one of the factors.
Everyone has different reaction times.

Reaction test:
http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/
Click to expand...

interesting but ultimately flawed test...once you get used to it you can just anticipate the green versus clicking after it turns green which gives you a nice low score which throws off your average and makes it appear to be much lower then it actually is
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top