Benchmarking GeForce GTX Titan 6 GB: Fast, Quiet, Consistent

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]ko888[/nom]Comparison of Radeon 7970 GHZ Edition cards in 2-way and 3-way CrossFire along with GTX Titan and GTX 680 in SLI mode here: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews [...] Titan_SLI/[/citation]

Were they incapable of using Nvidia's beta driver for the other Nvidia cards? If not, then why not use the same driver?

 

[hapkido]

Actually, three-way systems tend to scale decently nowadays from what I've seen. Still usually not as well as dual-GPU systems, but not bad around 35-45% over the dual GPU setup isn't rare and it's good.

The most improvement you could hope for going from 2 to 3 cards is 50%. People expecting performance to double when they add a second card and to double again when they add a third don't understand basic math.

 

[blazorthon]

The most improvement you could hope for going from 2 to 3 cards is 50%. People expecting performance to double when they add a second card and to double again when they add a third don't understand basic math.

I didn't know people were expecting more than 50%. Is that misunderstanding what's got people thinking triple GPU setups are junk?

 

[hapkido]

I didn't know people were expecting more than 50%. Is that misunderstanding what's got people thinking triple GPU setups are junk?

I think so. I hear things similar to, "Adding a second card adds ~90% performance, but the third one only adds ~40%."

 

[seinfeld]

so in summarizing. the card is a flop its slower then everything else at the same price point, and costs more! great job invidia

 

[piklar]

Some of you guys are missing the point of the Titan, Nvidia are charging a premium for the exclusitivity of having a rare card with supreme performance for those with the budget to afford two in SLI or want the most powerful small form factor gaming PC possible.

If the price on the card was based compertively and on it performance alone it would probably be 700-800USD.

I wouldnt call it a GTX 680 TI since it is an entirely different chip and is considerably more powerful than a GTX680.

Based on this article If I won lotto and didnt have to worry about $ it would be two Titans in SLI over any other card.

 

[piklar]

My apologies for the spelling mistakes and bad grammer in previous post, but you get the gist..

 

[rdc85]

Now, I know why AMD will not realease 8xxx card anytime soon....

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]piklar[/nom]Some of you guys are missing the point of the Titan, Nvidia are charging a premium for the exclusitivity of having a rare card with supreme performance for those with the budget to afford two in SLI or want the most powerful small form factor gaming PC possible.If the price on the card was based compertively and on it performance alone it would probably be 700-800USD.I wouldnt call it a GTX 680 TI since it is an entirely different chip and is considerably more powerful than a GTX680.Based on this article If I won lotto and didnt have to worry about $ it would be two Titans in SLI over any other card.[/citation]

There's a difference between missing the point and not caring about the point I do agree that I wouldn't call it a GTX 680 Ti, but GTX 685 seems reasonable. That it's called Titan instead implies that Nvidia doesn't want to mix compute and gaming oriented cards in the same releases anymore IMO.

Also, $600-700 seems like a more accurate placement i competition was being considered rather than $700-800 IMO.

 

[ChilledGrease]

I agree that no sane enthusiast would buy this at $1000, but I'd like to see some Quad-SLI benchmarks just for fun.

 

[ipwn3r456]

I thought this card is very capable for computing (GK110 core)... And can't even performs as close as the HD 7970 Ghz. Edition...

 

[bjaminnyc]

Should have been touted pre-bench release as a specialty card rather than a world beater. I think it would have been much better received and reviewed. I suppose for pre-built high end systems its a lot easier for a novice to utilize over SLI or CF with similar performance.

 

[tomfreak]

pricing wouldnt be so bad if they put $700-800 with only 3GB GDDR5. I still could not figure out why Nvidia is using 6GB. Its overkill lol

 

[keyston]

I remember when the gtx580 3gb cards were on the market, people were saying the same thing. try looking in the forums of nvidia anvanced rendering, otoy octane render, lumion 3d and the like.
pretty much everyone that uses those softs are either using, tesla, Quadro or minimum 1 gtx 580 3gb cards. Problem is the 580 only has 3gb ram. If this can match or beat the render speed of the gtx580, with 6gb ram, even for $1000 they will sell plenty as opposed to $5000 up for a tesla or quadra.
Theres a world outside gaming.

 

[keyston]

I don't suppose Toms would consider testing titan against a 3gb 580 and a quadra 5000 with Octane or iray. the results would be something a lot of people would be interested in. I could post links to the results in rendering and cg forums, and you guys could possibly get a lot more members.

 

[MyUsername2]

How does the middle card not melt?

 

[Guest]

Now, we need an article comparing 2 or 3 7970/680 versus 2 titans, in terms of microstuttering. And, of course, with the latest drivers.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]dasgaggag[/nom]Now, we need an article comparing 2 or 3 7970/680 versus 2 titans, in terms of microstuttering. And, of course, with the latest drivers.[/citation]

With and without RadeonPro


Also, my bringing it up makes me have to wonder why there isn't anything like it for Nvidia. Is it because it can't be done, or just because no one has done it yet?

 

[rantoc]

[citation][nom]aberkae[/nom]This just proves that dual sli scales the best, tri sli less so, and quad is well not worth it![/citation]

Try quad sli, the last card scale so bad its not uncommon to actually loose performance in real world games/applications but nVidia is even saying quad so their telling the truth. The sweet spot for sli scaling is definitely 2 cards!

 

[raxman]

The Titan is a major disappointment. To be sure the GK110 is a probably a marvel of engineering. The Titan could have been what the GTX580 (an awesome card!) was which was based on the GF110. Instead the Titan appears as if it is a rushed product with broken OpenCL drivers and a silly double floating point switch. But they still want you to pay as if the card is as great as the chip.

No gamer with any sense would buy this card. No OpenCL users would want this card. The only point I can think this card has is if CUDA users decide they want the Titan instead of the Tesla K20 because it's 3x cheaper. Maybe that's the point.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]raxman[/nom]Maybe that's the point.[/citation]

You're argument would work better if Nvidia wasn't marketing it as a gaming card. It's called Geforce Titan and it's grouped with their gaming cards in its marketing slides and graphs.

 

[rosmo01]

How is this switch set?:

"That’s why, if you want the card’s full compute potential, you need to toggle a driver switch."

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]rosmo01[/nom]How is this switch set?:"That’s why, if you want the card’s full compute potential, you need to toggle a driver switch."[/citation]

It's disabled by default. They say this in the article.

 

[rosmo01]

Yeees - and how do you ENABLE it?

 

[zeuseason]

The word 'Titan' in the name makes it worth at least $500 more than anything else out there. The fact it performs much less than dollar-for-dollar cards is Priceless.