NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Video Card Review @ [H]

Don't like the price? Make more money.

A lot of people here could easily afford it without batting an eye. But that doesnt mean that they dont think the card is over priced. Even millionaires have a sense of value proposition. I like the performance, and really would like to not deal with SLI/Xfire but given that a GTX 690 or Xfire 7970s can be had for the same price or less and is faster in performance by quite a margin makes this a very weird value proposition for most, the only question here is if the potential headaches of SLI/Xfire is worth a few extra hundred. For me I am starting to think its not worth it.
 
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.:D
 
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.:D

I hope not, and I don't think so. As the article mentioned, this is a special card outside of the normal GeForce series.

However, ridiculous price may occur if a card is the absolute fastest, AND there's no competition. Titan has no competition at the moment. I believe the GTX 680 would have been priced higher if it wasn't for AMD's strong showing.

If AMD can release an answer to this, I'll bet Titan price will drop (the same way AMD dropped their price after the release of 680 which undercut AMD's previous price). Otherwise, we'll have to wait for the next round I guess.
 
Here is some real news. AMDs fps numbers are overstated. They figured out a trick to make runt frames, or frames which are not actually rendered to trigger the fps monitor as a real fully rendered frame. This is real problem for AMD much worse than the latency problem. Crossfire is a disaster which is why numerous reviewers including Tech Report have written that Crossfire produces higher fps but feels less smooth than Nvidia.
Check this article out. http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...ance-Review-and-Frame-Rating-Update/Frame-Rat
 
AMDs fps numbers are overstated. They figured out a trick to make runt frames, or frames which are not actually rendered to trigger the fps monitor as a real fully rendered frame. This is real problem for AMD much worse than the latency problem. Crossfire is a disaster which is why numerous reviewers including Tech Report have written that Crossfire produces higher fps but feels less smooth than Nvidia.
Check this article out. http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...ance-Review-and-Frame-Rating-Update/Frame-Rat
 
Don't like the price? Make more money.

Most ppl can easily afford this card.......But just because something is ridiculously priced doesn't make it a good buy. If i sold you a gold plated 2013 VW beetle for 100k I am sure you would tell me that I am out of my mind. I understand if you have a seven figure salary then rational decisions wont make any sense to you but most of us want to make some sensible decisions.
 
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.:D

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.
 
Something else to consider: for those with rotated systems the Silverstone FT02 and FT03, the Titan is a better bet than the 690 because the fan in the 690 has to push some of the air down and out whereas with the Titan, it's all up and out.
 
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.

If you want awesome nv surround 2/3 of these seem really sweet.

I believe I also read it doesnt support NV surround unless you have more then 1 card? :confused:

I guess people will have to weigh the pros and cons. If you have to have single card best performance, Titan wins. People with single monitors and needing sli/cfx, the price point becomes a factor. ~$800 or so for cfx 7970's, ~$1200 for tri. I wonder if the scaling on tri 7970's would do against the sli Titan.
 
I can get 2 more 680 lightnings for the same price. What to do what to do. Single monitor 1920x1080.
 
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!!! :D
 
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!!! :D

I actually can't max out all current games for 100% smooth frame rate even at 1400mhz. Definitely think 2 would be more than enough. I just wish the titans weren't so ridiculously priced. Not sure whether to cancel pre-order or not. Haha
 
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.

Well, yes I did read the article.
Frankly, I see this as the start of a very bad precident.
Put out the fastest card.....charge a thousand for it.
honestly, the GTX 680 was honestly a mid-range release put out in answer to the strong showing from AMD with the 7950/7990.

The 680s were/are most likely overpriced, even now.

So what do you do?

You fancy up what you were supposed to release a year ago and charge a grand.
and you keep doing it.

There HAVE been expensive GPUs in the past, and I'm sure there will be in the future, but if this keeps up, our "hobby" is going to suffer and quite franky disappear.....I'd rather spend this kind of money on my car.......it is way more utilitarian.
 
Stated in the review...that is all coming at a later time. Patience, young Padawan. ;)
Its going to be very interesting too!

I was looking at [H]'s review of the tri 7970's, and it looks pretty good for the Titans(in SLI). I know it will be a much better review with the same hardware and newest drivers(AMD has improved them alot).

The comparison I was looking at was BF3 multiplayer, since both had that in the review.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/04/25/geforce_gtx_680_3way_sli_radeon_7970_trifire_review/4

It will be funny if the 7970 will need 4 cards to keep up.
 
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.

Green eyes only ;)

way to expensive for the performance.
 
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'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.
 
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.
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)
 
This thread has been an interesting read.

The card has merit, although it does seem like there's a slight paradigm shift in play on this site.

Typically review sites cater to their audience with their reviews. That makes sense, because you want to bring readers information they can use. This site is predominated by gaming enthusiasts, however the review is geared toward system integrators and other niche segments not widely represented here.

I think, at the end of the day, that's why people are upset. It feels like the Gold Award is being forced on the product, and the justification is not in line with the criteria that readers of this site typically use to evaluate products.

As for me, I like the card, but I have no use for something that costs $1000 in an age where computers can be built for less than that, even for gaming enthusiasts. So the review doesn't hold a lot of value for me.

Just my two cents.
 
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.


Can't put the all the blame on Nvidia with regards to pricing. It's priced at $999 because there's no competition from AMD at the high-end (the GTX 680 competes with the 7970). If AMD had a Titan-competitor do you think we'd see prices like this? While you're blaming Nvidia don't forget to blame the competition too (or lack thereof).

But yes, I agree with you. It is a rip-off. It sucks for us customers that there's only 2 camps (red or green) to choose from.
 
Last edited:
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)

I haven't had Radeon's for a while, so I didn't know they had improved. Good to know, thank you.

When I had my monster dual three slot Asus 6970 DirectCU II's though, the drivers were absolutely atrocious, and most new titles didn't work properly in CFX MONTHS after release. Based simply on that, I am reticent about ever going CFX again.

I have a lot more faith in SLI stability, but I still don't like the inherent added lag caused by AFR. If only more titles supported some sort of split frame mode...

REALLY old illustration I always use, as I have yet to see a better one:
7125601965_776096cd0b_o.gif
 
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...
 
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.
 
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.

Ahh, Thank you. I hope they aren't all gone by then.
 
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...

Paypal Debit Card?
 
...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" cinematic quality visuals of what I have been treated in 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.
 
...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.

If Crysis 3 was the everyday standard in visuals and other studios were do better work than that, I would buy a Titan now.
That's the only game I would need one for, so right now it's a no buy for me.
 
Definitely impressive but a little steep at launch. With this kind of performance bump it makes a person hopeful for the future of PC hardware and gaming. Makes me wonder what kind of toys I'll be buying for next year's tax refund.
 
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.

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.
 
...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>

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.
 
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...
 
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...


I agree with you. Hopefully this is the direction things will go in, as there are really big limiting returns on resolution above 2560x1600...

That being said, seeing the hardware selection for the next generation of consoles is all AMD APU's, and 4k resolution TV's are on their way, my feeling is that unfortunately this will likely not happen, except for some outliers, new PC only studios.
 
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, as you will potentially see better quality and more immediate PC ports, a possible PS4 emulator and so on.
 
AWESOME REVIEW!!!!!!!!!!!!
(as always)

It seems like most are bitching about the price. Whats the big deal Intel has $1000 CPUs Nvidia has $1000 and it is all relative. if you have $100 in the bank $1000 seems like a lot if you have $10,000 a $1000 don't seem as much and on and on.

Is it good. Yes!

will i buy one or do i need it? no.

I did notice that a few people had issues with SLI or CrossFire in the past and do not want to take the chance on SLI or CF. The GTX Titan fits the bill. It is faster then the GTX 680 and just a tad slower then GTX 690.

One question i do have is. How much has SLI improved? I personally have owned several SLI setups and they all had there problems. My old GTX 295 had some of the worst problems that i rarely ran it in SLI mode.
 
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.

In the hard news today, AMD announced they had been selected for PS4 APU.

This is both good and bad news. Good news, in that the architecture will be so much closer to PC, bad news in that it is only an APU, so graphics power will not be as big a jump in the next generation as we had hoped.

Kyle and team are also betting on that the next gen Xbox will also go AMD...
 
Back
Top