NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Video Card Review @ [H]

DooKey said:
Where did he pre-order? Damn Newegg only lets you order one at a time.
Click to expand...

I think he has one at newegg, one at TD and one on EVGA or something. He said he had to hit 3 different sites for it.
 
roki977 said:
Its 35% faster than 680 but only 10% slower than 690?

700-800$ would be ok range in my opinion. 1000$ sounds very expensive.
Click to expand...

Did everybody suddenly forget that SLI scaling is not 100% in nearly anything besides 3Dmark? A 690 is not twice as fast as a 680 in most games. Hell, my 680 Lightning at 1400 came pretty close to my 690 at stock in some games that I play.
 
Zarathustra[H];1039637025 said:
...
What you fail to realize is that there is no such thing as a universal value of a product. It all depends on when, where, and how it is being sold, and what else is available at the time. The only fair price, is that price which satisfies supply and demand.
Click to expand...

Thanks, that was coherent.

What annoyed me most about ragecase's post was how it reminded me of the slew of butthurt enthusiasts complaining over Nvidia's release of a "mid range" card last year. It wasn't mid range, it was faster than the then fastest AMD card, which made it high end. That's the definition of high end. Some articles explained how it wasn't the biggest kepler, so the 680 got positioned in people's minds as a mid range part despite the benchmarks showing otherwise. Not to mention all the other technical advancements that helped justify its price at the time (efficiency, noise, adaptive v-sync, others I'm missing no doubt). Christ I was hoping this sh*t was laid to rest by now. So what if Nvidia released its bigger die 1 year later? What matters is they released an awesome product (680 GTX) that fit nicely in the price/performance curve at the time.

That being said, the Titan looks awesome though I'll never buy one at this price point. I head somewhere that the S-Class is what sells lower-end Mercedes'. I'll never buy an S-Class, but I can still admire it.
 
Reminders me of a sad and pathetic attempt by 3dfx some years back about a Voodoo 5500 thing.

Poor nVidiots.

Ok. I'm fishing but who reads 11 threads deep. ;)
 
Tweak42 said:
This pretty much sums up everything. Ball is in AMD's court now. :D
Click to expand...


AMD doesn't really have to do anything. It is an extremely low volume part, priced to a small niche. Even at $1000, considering the minimal yield and volume, it's not making much money for Nvidia and hardly takes anything from AMD.
 
GoldenTiger said:
guru3dtitancomparison.jpg


Yes. (That's a summary of Guru3d's numbers).
Click to expand...

woot! the 690 is still king!
 
Err, the Voodoo 5500 or 6000, whatever it was, come out a zombie product almost after the company was dead, and is nothing like this product.
 
rinaldo00 said:
Exactly, and you know why? Because economics has to deal with human EMOTION (the demand side) unlike mathematics (my major)
Click to expand...

True, or like Engineering, mine.


Not that it isn't possible to quantify human emotion...


You just need a REALLY large sample size, and collecting that kind of data is EXPENSIVE (and just not practical)
 
Ultra was the same thing. But it was in 800$ range and totally worthless when gtx 2x0 came out.
 
If it takes two of these in SLI to outpace a single GTX 690, and a SLI configuration would cost twice as much as a single GTX690, then why is that even brought up in the closing comments?

The whole selling point seemed to be geared towards a single GPU and not dealing with the "baggage" of a multi-GPU setup.

Honestly this should be at the $600-700 price point, and I don't see why anybody would spend $1k on this?

P.S. Didn't read all 12 pages of replies, so I hope some of this isn't redundant.
 
JPW said:
If it takes two of these in SLI to outpace a single GTX 690, and a SLI configuration would cost twice as much as a single GTX690, then why is that even brought up in the closing comments?

The whole selling point seemed to be geared towards a single GPU and not dealing with the "baggage" of a multi-GPU setup.

Honestly this should be at the $600-700 price point, and I don't see why anybody would spend $1k on this?
Click to expand...

Actually, it takes two of these to outpace four GPU's on two 690's ;).
 
Some people keep saying Titan is a limited edition product. But nvidia has stated that it will be readily available and there should be no supply issues

Its probably easier to find Titan now than it was finding a GTX680 when it came out.

Go figure...
 
Zarathustra[H];1039637274 said:
True, or like Engineering, mine.


Not that it isn't possible to quantify human emotion...


You just need a REALLY large sample size, and collecting that kind of data is EXPENSIVE (and just not practical)
Click to expand...

I like the other approach. Release it for $1K and see what happens.
Poor sales? Ooops! Lower price to $699. Deal with early buyer rage, but sales increased. Goal achieved.
 
Great Review [H]. You all covered, as usual, all points about the GTX Titan as I've come to expect. I only have one question:

Why were the GTX 680 2GB Frame Buffer cards used instead of the 4GB versions?
 
I'm impressed with the "Titan". I honestly love people that can afford them to push them to the extreme. It gives people {like me} that can't afford it a way to gauge what they have. It is really simple, if you can afford it you will buy it. If not you will be like me and read reviews, threads and post by the ones that can afford it.

Am I mad about it? Absolutely not, I have no problems with people buying stuff they can afford. That is what you work for to have nice things. This is how life goes and how it always will be. So do tend to push too hard when buying stuff. but it still falls on the people that have the money to do it with.

If I could sale a leg, arm, kidney and few other parts. I would still have the other side to use to hit the benchmark button and game with....right? Either way enough with the jokes.

Thanks for sharing the review [H] with us. It was a interesting read. Any thoughts or plans to do one card over Nvidia Surround perhaps?
 
I really hope nobody buys this so the price drops.

I'd pay $700, maybe $800 (that's really pushing it) but a stack?

How long till the price on this thing drops you think?
 
ICOM said:
Reminders me of a sad and pathetic attempt by 3dfx some years back about a Voodoo 5500 thing.

Poor nVidiots.

Ok. I'm fishing but who reads 11 threads deep. ;)
Click to expand...

I had a voodoo 5500! (not the phantom 6000) It was the last 3dfx card, and the most advanced card without a GPU! (the two things are not a coincidence) But one under-appreciated fact about it was that it ran Unreal engine games in glide mode the way otherwise completely superior nVidia cards couldn't come close to in D3D for a long time.

It was the ultimate UT99 card.
 
I kinda want to jump on this but then again don't want to. The reference cooler doesn't leave much room for overclocking. If there is ever a non reference cool/board like the MSI 680 Lightning then I'll be very much interested.
 
damstr said:
I kinda want to jump on this but then again don't want to. The reference cooler doesn't leave much room for overclocking. If there is ever a non reference cool/board like the MSI 680 Lightning then I'll be very much interested.
Click to expand...

The cooler doesn't get any better. I'll like to see MSI pull of something like the Titan's cooler.

Ask Kyle how much he loves it:
http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1039636811&postcount=166

1.2GHz is reachable.
 
damstr said:
I kinda want to jump on this but then again don't want to. The reference cooler doesn't leave much room for overclocking. If there is ever a non reference cool/board like the MSI 680 Lightning then I'll be very much interested.
Click to expand...

EVGA is coming out with a water cooled version, no word on price yet.
 
temujin987 said:
hmm, no need to upgrade from my gtx 690, i guess.
Click to expand...

i was thinking same but - OMG, it's a whole 1/2 inch smaller, so will 'fit' SFF cases(yeh, right) and it 'only' has 1GPU, so no microstutter( even though I've never seen SLI m/stutter on my 690)...nice card...
 
rinaldo00 said:
I saw that, it sure looks like the same cooler on the refernce 600s though.
Click to expand...

Maybe it is, maybe they've improved in terms of the chip's power leakage or any factor that contributes to its heat dissipation.

nVidia have been pushing for higher efficiency since Kepler. Can't wait to see what they can achieve with Maxwell. :)
 
Brent_Justice said:
Testing was done with Catalyst 13.2 Beta 6. The CAP information was leftover cut and paste information we use in reviews. I forgot to take that out of the table. It is fixed now. We used the newer CAP embedded in 13.2 Beta 6, so testing is not in error, it was just a typo on that page, sorry for the confusion. Page 2 is fixed.
Click to expand...

Thank you for clarifying, delighted to hear it was just a typo. Good work.
 
GoldenTiger said:
Quoted for truth. It's harder to raise MSRP than it is to lower it ;).



Here, you want to know why? Enjoy the stuttery GE 7970, people who want the best will go Titan... yes, it's pricey as all hell, but it's worth it for those with the cash to play:

pcperframetimestitan.png


Titan falls right in line with 680 SLI in their review.

And, it's only 10% or so behind a 690 in most reviews... as a single GPU :eek: .
Click to expand...

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.
 
Great review guys.

Not sure where all the whining on price is coming from. Its not a 700 series card , it was made for a purpose that it won't be able to serve since AMD has nothing in the pipe that powerful in a single GPU solution.

So considering that it isn't suppose to be a flagship card for a new generation of GPU .. why all the fuss? If you don't want to spend a grand on a single GPU video card that's fine but there is no reason to cry about it.

Either way its a very impressive card. I will admit if I had the disposable income I would probably buy one , just for the crazy performance but I just got 2 GTX 670's and that's more than enough for me ..for now.
 
Pastyface said:
I appreciate the review and do find it very thorough. I however disagree with your Gold award. Money means something and the price/performance just isn't there. Makes me sad that despite how appealing this card is, the price snaps me back to reality. I hope everyone who buys it really enjoys it and doesn't get screwed over when the next generation gets released.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with you! :D

Think! If this was to be the 7 series, you would expect a good deal of performance for an upgrade. So I cannot see the justification of this price! :eek:

How are they going to get round it? Take away the compute power? Hope you know what I mean! :D
 
martinmsj said:
Titan is not artificially handicapped like the 580/480's were, All their compute performance is unlocked. See Anand's article for more details, moreover this card is also an entry level K20 compute card. You can actually go into the drivers and switch it to this mode. Only trade off is you loose clocks/boost clocks when you unlock the Tesla K20X like performance but you gain all the DP performance. (Stuff that is missing are just features only good for compute clusters such as the OpenMPI stuff, ECC, etc..)
Click to expand...

Good to know, thanks for the info. My Maya3D machines are salivating for these.
 
All that said, 6GB of VRAM on the GeForce GTX TITAN is all about the future. NVIDIA's comment on VRAM to us was, "Build it, and they will come." We have to say, we agree with this. We were happy and agreed with the decision when we were introduced to the AMD Radeon HD 7970 and 7950 back in 2011 to incorporate 3GB of RAM. At the time, this seemed like a lot of VRAM back in December of 2011. However, we are seeing today how the extra RAM on the HD 7970 and 7950 have benefited some of the latest games. In this same vein, down the road, this year, the next, we may even see how more VRAM impacts games to come.
Click to expand...

Maybe it is because Tesla already had 6GB of ram onboard and testing it in the realm of games made sense to keep it that way.

The only thing that didn't make sense is a consumer product that is in direct competition with it's own Nvidia GTX 690 both price and performance, what even made less sense is Nvidia always boasting about how important the GPGPU is to them and how many super computers they power up , yet not important enough to keep selling the card for triple the current price in the high end GPGPU market .....
 
This is a really good card, as a matter of fact I was going to buy two of them (I have 2yr exchange plan on my gtx 690's through microcenter), but after seeing nvidia's greed and pricing (and reviews) I have decided to keep my gtx 690's. I was ready to shell out 2k for 2 cards but seeing that nvidia decieved us all with by pricing the gtx 680 cards in the same league as old gen flag ship cards makes me sick. Also this card is lost in its role, for example its not a true gamers card (gtx 690 is still faster) and its not the fastest compute card either, but what truly was the deal breaker for me is the overclocking and temp side of this card.
 
Godmachine said:
So considering that it isn't suppose to be a flagship card for a new generation of GPU .. why all the fuss? If you don't want to spend a grand on a single GPU video card that's fine but there is no reason to cry about it.
Click to expand...

It IS supposed to be the flagship for a next gen GPU.

And Its my party and I cry if I want to :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top