Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Don't like the price? Make more money.
My concern over this card IS the price.
This card truely IS a flagship product, nichey niche or not.
Does this mean that the next big thing out of nVidia is always going to carry a $1000 price tag?
So I'm going to have to get used to GTX 780 being a cool thousand?
This IS getting silly. I guess for my money I'm going to have to get used to console graphics, because a thousand a crack is just too much......and it isn't like I can't afford it, but I do like to eat as well.....and pay my children's college tuition.
Don't like the price? Make more money.
My concern over this card IS the price.
This card truely IS a flagship product, nichey niche or not.
Does this mean that the next big thing out of nVidia is always going to carry a $1000 price tag?
So I'm going to have to get used to GTX 780 being a cool thousand?
This IS getting silly. I guess for my money I'm going to have to get used to console graphics, because a thousand a crack is just too much......and it isn't like I can't afford it, but I do like to eat as well.....and pay my children's college tuition.
A single 680 on 1080 single monitor is pretty good, 2 of em, should be good overkill.I can get 2 more 680 lightnings for the same price. What to do what to do. Single monitor 1920x1080.
A single 680 on 1080 single monitor is pretty good, 2 of em, should be good overkill.
Or sell the 680 and have to put about 600 or so out of pocket for a Titan.
Decisions!!!
Didn't you read the review? I suggest you read it again.
And no, it doesn't, the same stupid crap went around when the 8800 ultra came out, that it was going to mean prices of the top cards were going to be that price from then on. You know what? It didn't happen. It won't happen this time either.
Yes , thank you Captian Obviousthey were review samples. Commercial availability is slated for the end of the month.
id like to see it face 7970 ghz edition crossfire and the 7990 cards
Its going to be very interesting too!Stated in the review...that is all coming at a later time. Patience, young Padawan.
The 7970 GE in that chart does quite well for frametimes, it's only Crossfire that looks crap. So simply stating "Enjoy the stuttery GE 7970" while ignoring the CF part is a non-sequitur, because in fact a single GE 7970 is getting better frame times in that chart than a GTX 680.
It seems like a sweet card if you want to max 1080, if you need just a little bit more for like 1200 or 1440, it seems that dual 7970's would be much cheaper.
I have been reading the opposite of AMD's 79xx series with the new drivers and such.Zarathustra[H];1039639319 said:I'm considering picking one up for my single 2560x1600 gaming needs. I know it won't be fast enough to max every title, by any means, but it will be faster than my single 680...
I'm kind of meh on SLI due to reliability and lag problems with AFR, and 100% meh on CFX solutions, because AMD's dual GPU implementation just sucks so much ass, and has enormous reliability issues.
While everyone is impressed with the performance of Titan....
It would of been nice to find a review somewhere that called nvidia out on Titan costing $1000, especially in the context of GTX 680/GK104 clearly being a mid-range card while Titan is more in line with flagship cards of the past. Such as GTX 580, 480, 285, 280.
Sure nvidia is trying to promote it as a 'boutique' card, but it's still a 500mm2 or so die, with a wide memory bus, lots of VRAM and taken off their compute line of GPUs, just like all their past gaming flagships until 28nm. Historically nvidia has delivered 80% more performance on their new node's flagship against the last node's. That is exactly what Titan does against GTX 580, whereas GTX 680 gave only 30-35%. Let them promote it as whatever they want, we all see it for what it is; the real GTX 680 with its price doubled.
It's a rip-off. Just like the GTX 680 was a rip-off. Nvidia has jacked prices twofold this generation and no one is calling them on it but the gamers who are having to pay these ripoff prices, or stay on 40nm. At least we have $400 7970GE that gives 80% the performance of a $1000 Titanic.
I have been reading the opposite of AMD's 79xx series with the new drivers and such.
There are too many factors to say that they suck or are great. I have no preference for AMD or Nvidia, but am looking at either brand for my next card, though I have mostly only gamed at 1080. If i had a bigger desk maybe eyefinity would look and feel better.
I would see if any friends have a 680 and try putting it in your system and see how it works, since the dual 680's would help alot more then the single Titan.(cheaper)
Zarathustra[H];1039639478 said:Hmm.
I went to pre-order a Titan on Newegg, but for some reason they wouldn't take my PayPal like they usually do. That's where I have all my money from eBay sales...
You can't use Paypal on preorder because they don't charge until the card comes in and is ready to ship out. If you wait till they have them in stock your Paypal will work fine.
Zarathustra[H];1039639478 said:Hmm.
I went to pre-order a Titan on Newegg, but for some reason they wouldn't take my PayPal like they usually do. That's where I have all my money from eBay sales...
...And I guess this isn't really a comment or criticism regardring only the GTX TITAN, but more so the state of gaming graphics. For the past 3 - 4 years, we've been treated to some amazing advancements in computer graphics hardware; better processes for manufacturing, more efficent, cheaper price/performance parts.
However, in those same 3 - 4 years, we have been promised (because of said advancements above) better end result - i.e, better graphics. I think the industry has delivered what was promised on the hardware side, but the software side is strangely lacking.
In these past 3 - 4 years, we've seen screenshots and demos of what graphics can look like with the provided hardware. They look amazing. The problem is, up until now, I have yet to see anything that comes close to the "pre-rendered-like" quality of what I have seen in the demos, and I think ultimately for me, this is what is lacking in the harware graphics industry: software; that killer app.
I can afford the Titan, so I'm not complaning about the price; albeit it is high, but I expect that from a flagship product. What I don't want to do, is to afford the Titan despite the fact that there is little-to-no reason for anyone to buy it, even if they did have the means to do so. So, what I REALLY want is a game that will push the Titan to its limits and perhaps beyond. I want those pre-rendered looking cinematic graphics rendered in realtime. I want something that will make my jaw drop. Give me that, and I'll sign up for one or more.
I can afford the Titan, so I'm not complaning about the price; albeit it is high, but I expect that from a flagship product. What I don't want to do, is to afford the Titan despite the fact that there is little-to-no reason for anyone to buy it, even if they did have the means to do so. So, what I REALLY want is a game that will push the Titan to its limits and perhaps beyond. I want those pre-rendered looking cinematic graphics rendered in realtime. I want something that will make my jaw drop. Give me that, and I'll sign up for one or more.
...And I guess this isn't really a comment or criticism regardring only the GTX TITAN, but more so the state of gaming graphics. For the past 3 - 4 years, we've been treated to some amazing advancements in computer graphics hardware; better processes for manufacturing, more efficent, cheaper price/performance parts.<snip>
Zarathustra[H];1039639667 said:If you really want to challenge your hardware, just get a larger resolution monitor.
1080p is no longer a challenge for today's hardware with current titles.
2560x1600 - however - still is.
And while I would appreciate more challenging graphics, I don't want it to come at the cost of resolution. What if the state of graphics was enhanced so much that the hardware was still limiting ups to 800x600 or 1024x768 gameplay? That wouldn't be good either.
Right now, the balance seems just right if you get to the 2560x1440 or 2560x1600 level. At 1920x1080 or 1920x1200, your comments are very valid.
I agree with you 100%. I run at 2560x1600 at home and it is a good balance - However, my point is, and I will give it one more try - I don't think I expressed it correctly before - I don't want images just to look sharper per se. For the past decade, it has always been about more of the same things: More memory, more shaders, more megatexels, more clockspeed, more polygons, and of course, more resolution. It's always those same variables that get upped, and I'm definitely not complaining about it - I just wish they would start pushing in a different general direction.
Theoretically, you can take a 3D scene of a simple box with 6 polygons and push a GTX 690 if you increased the resolution enough and then add a bunch of AA on it, but it really isn't going to make it look that much better - I'm thinking more along the lines of better looking product as opposed to better technical graphics, or pushing hardware for the sake of pushing hardware. i.e., I want my games to look closer to 'Avatar' and less like a really sharp 'Reboot' episode.
Obviously artistic design and the disparity between that and the hardware and tools has a lot to do with it. Anyhow, I'm rambling on...
Consoles. Whether you like them or not, it can't be denied that they've put a severe drag on graphic advancement. When the larger market (unfortunately) has only 1/10th the processing power of a current gen PC, not as much work is going to go into taking advantage of said PC.
Undoubtably, consoles do play a huge part in this - The fact that we havent had a new generation of consoles for almost a decade doesn't help either. Hopefully with the upcoming PS4 and its competators, this is going to change.
Additionally, a bit off topic; I read somewhere that the PS4 will be using a x86/x64 based processor. This is big news, as this pretty much makes the PS4 development environment a PC. I see this as a pretty big plus for PC gaming, you will potentially see better quality PC ports, a possible PS4 emulator and so on.