GeForce GTX Titan X Review: Can One GPU Handle 4K?

[pxl9190]

Call this GPU 980TI with 6GB of VRAM for ~$700 would be what most ppl would want.

Though for most people playing at 4K, 2 x 980 4GB in SLI would make the most sense.

 

[skit75]

The titan x seems to be just enough to comfortable handle 1440p gaming. 4K gaming is still a a bare minimum of SLI.

(30FPS it just too much console peasantry to be besmirching our eyes with for PC gaming)

I would agree at least on the enthusiast level of graphics.

More bench-marking will soon arrive showing what it is capable of at low/medium/high graphical settings. The reviewer hints at a perceived smoothness even at lower FPS due to Gsync in this Ultra settings test environment. I would imagine a medium or high graphics setting in your game might get you closer to that 60 FPS @ 4K target with dips into the 40's?

I have not seen Gsync in person, yet. I will be getting the Asus ROG Swift 27" 1440p 144Hz monitor as a gift in the next couple weeks. I believe it will make my GTX 770 cry uncle.

 

[ykki]

So... with the 295x2 around, is there any reason to get the titan x?

 

[2late2die]

The R9 295x2 beats the Titan in almost every benchmark, and it's almost half the price.. I know the Titan X is just one gpu but the numbers don't lie nvidia. And nvidia fanboys can just let the salt flow through your veins that a previous generation card(s) can beat their newest and most powerful card. Cant wait for the 3xx series to smash the nvidia 9xx series

Well a 690 can beat a 290X, what's your point??

I don't understand why the AMD fanboys are getting so bent out of shape trying to trash this card? Titans have always been overpriced, it's nothing new, but they're also a bit of a status symbol (which is a whole separate discussion anyway), and it's a flagship card, those always go for a permium.

When the R9 295x2 came out it was $1500, not exactly chump change, and AMD only dropped the price because that was the only way they could compete (and it's not hating, that's was actually the case). Now, the upcoming 390 may very well kick Nvidia's ass, and if it does then Nvidia will be forced to drop their prices, which is good for everyone.

In the meantime, yes the Titan is overpriced, but it's also the fastest single chip card on the market and if you've been burned by SLI and Crossfire in the past (like I did) then that has value. Power consumption and size is also not something everybody can overlook. If you're looking to upgrade a small case with a 850W power supply (and money is not a huge issue) then you're much better off with a single Titan then 2 780s, 2 290x's or even a 295x2. Again, this is obviously not a consideration for everyone, but could be for some.

As for the 390, whatever the rumors say until it actually comes out and we get to see the reviews and the benchmarks, anything to be said about it is pure speculation.

 

[Shneiky]

Fail. Epic fail by nVidia and by Tom's hardware.

Where are all the compute reviews? You do realize 90% of the people who buy Titans use them as a better-Quadro for compute and not for gaming.

The only thing I was interested at all was completely skipped by the benchmarks. By my own personal calculations, the Titan X will be slower in compute than the older Titan. Too bad noone posted the benchmarks to prove this. Or was it a dark veil from nVidia.

 

[redgarl]

Okay guys, I call your game benches BS. I own two 290x in CF @ 4k. In Shadow of Mordor, you cannot use Ultra preset for texture even with two video cards of 4GB. The game pass from 60+ FPS to 10 FPS every 10 seconds. This is due to the overwhelming amount of video memory needed for that preset. At High preset I was having a constant 60 FPS.

You guys don't play the games, you just run the benches and it gives this present article.

 

[redgarl]

In short, dual GPU is still the only 4k alternative.

 

[nikoli707]

i would be willing to bet the gm200 at 1400mhz(which is where a few of these titan x's are being overclocked to currently) will come very close to 295x2 numbers when it comes to games.

 

[anthony8989]

Sadly, it will be a few more generations of graphics card before the general public fully realizes what the Titan series is and what it attempts to achieve. Until then - ignorant comments abroad.

 

[chaosmassive]

so basically the writer is agree with Nvidia that the price set at $1000? seriously?

as long as I read all GPU article in Toms, at least will give us
price/performance ratio or suggested price...
compare with older TITAN, which gave us FP64 also priced same.

and dont feign ignorance, AMD card just around the corner and you know it...

 

[firefoxx04]

Digital Storm has 3 way SLI review up, just an FYI. It seemed to do pretty well with consistent 60fps + for only $3000.

 

[sincreator]

IGN said that the R9 390x (8.6 TF) is 38% more powerful than the Titan X (6.2 TF), is that's true? http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/03/17/rumored-specs-of-amd-radeon-r9-390x-leaked

Well, that's the big question now...isn't it? AMD hasn't unwrapped any R9 3000 series parts yet and until they do, nvidia is TOP DOG. I fear AMD may be too far behind on power efficiency to keep up with nvidia at this point, and if they can the aesthetics (heat and noise) will be ridiculous.

Here is a pretty reliable leak concerning the r9 390x. Even Hilbert agreed it looks genuine. "Well have a peek yourself, as far as I can tell these slides are the real deal" - Hilbert Hagedoorn(Guru3d) : http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/more-radeon-r9-390x-specs-leak.html

If the 390x indeed turns out this kind of performance increase, the Titan X may not be a smart buy for gamers looking to drive 4k resolution. Like always though, the Titan variant is more for the professional crowd. I'm not sure if there would be a GTX980ti release at some point or not, but if there is, that card will be more for the gamer crowd at a lower price point. Just like the last generation.

 

[tomfreak]

TITAN X = a card that is marketing to be a compute card with gaming experience.

Review/benchmark is out = No compute benchmark. Seriously?

 

[videogame57]

The R9 295x2 beats the Titan in almost every benchmark, and it's almost half the price.. I know the Titan X is just one gpu but the numbers don't lie nvidia. And nvidia fanboys can just let the salt flow through your veins that a previous generation card(s) can beat their newest and most powerful card. Cant wait for the 3xx series to smash the nvidia 9xx series

I don't know where you're getting your benchmarks fool.

=2878&cmp[]=2433&cmp[]=2525]http://videocardbenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=2878&cmp[]=2433&cmp[]=2525

The 1st generation Titan beats the 295x2, and for added hurt, so does the 780.

The Titan is an older generation GPU than the 295x2, as is the 780,
and as per typical AMD, the R9 295X2 uses twice as much power as the other 2 cards.

The numbers don't lie, you said it yourself.

 

[renz496]

IGN said that the R9 390x (8.6 TF) is 38% more powerful than the Titan X (6.2 TF), is that's true? http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/03/17/rumored-specs-of-amd-radeon-r9-390x-leaked

right now leak is all over the place. also Titan X is 7 Teraflop in single precision not 6.2 like in early rumor suggest. and the other day there are leak showing that 390X is only slightly faster than Titan X despite the bigger gap it has in Teraflops against Titan X. will be interesting to see 390X power consumption. the latest slide leak for 390X suggest that the card will use both 6 pin + 8 pin and 8 pin + 8 pin config. and we know the two 8 pin config in 295x2 does not mean 375w max power consumption on the card.

 

[videogame57]

IGN said that the R9 390x (8.6 TF) is 38% more powerful than the Titan X (6.2 TF), is that's true? http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/03/17/rumored-specs-of-amd-radeon-r9-390x-leaked

right now leak is all over the place. also Titan X is 7 Teraflop in single precision not 6.2 like in early rumor suggest. and the other day there are leak showing that 390X is only slightly faster than Titan X despite the bigger gap it has in Teraflops against Titan X. will be interesting to see 390X power consumption. the latest slide leak for 390X suggest that the card will use both 6 pin + 8 pin and 8 pin + 8 pin config. and we know the two 8 pin config in 295x2 does not mean 375w max power consumption on the card.

It's AMD, of course it's going to use at least 2x more power than it's competitors.

 

[chaosmassive]

TITAN X = a card that is marketing to be a compute card with gaming experience.

Review/benchmark is out = No compute benchmark. Seriously?

did you read properly? on TITAN X FP64 is disabled, so pretty much is gaming card
just have same like GTX 980 and have bigger resources...

pls dont become brand victim...

 

[renz496]

so basically the writer is agree with Nvidia that the price set at $1000? seriously?

as long as I read all GPU article in Toms, at least will give us
price/performance ratio or suggested price...
compare with older TITAN, which gave us FP64 also priced same.

and dont feign ignorance, AMD card just around the corner and you know it...

with no FP64 the 1k price tag indeed silly. but probably 601mm2 chip was not cheap as well. i think this is the largest nvidia gpu to date. and about AMD i think we better talk about it when the card actually here. i mean when nvidia launch 900 series back in september many said AMD card will launch soon as well. and there are talks about AMD are done with the card and building up the inventory to hard launch the card in jan/feb time frame. fast forward to march....still nothing. and there are too many rumors floating around right now about 390X. to be honest i'm a bit tired of it because i've heard 'it will come out soon' since late last year. what happen to captain jack?

 

[renz496]

People go on comparing a dual GPU 295x2 to a single-GPU TitanX. What about games where there is no Crossfire profile? It's effectively a TitanX vs 290X comparison.
Personally, I think a fair comparison would be the GTX Titan X vs the R9 390X. Although I heard NVIDIA's card will be slower then.
Alternatively, we could go for 295X2 vs TitanX SLI or 1080SLI(Assuming a 1080 is a Titan X with a few SMMs disabled, and half the VRAM, kind of like the Titan and 780).

What games dont have a crossfire profile? And why bother comparing a Titan X SLI vs a 295x2 when the SLI would cost almost 4x as much? Sure the performance would marginally be better (30-40% max), but at what cost? At a performance per dollar perspective the Titan X and Tian X SLI would be scraping the very bottom of the barrel.

Dying Light for example. AMD has not releasing new driver since Omega (i heard they will release new driver on 19th for FreeSync) so any games coming out after Omega does not have CF profiles. and some other game out right hate multi gpu config regardless it is SLI or CF like Companies of Heroes 2.

 

[renz496]

Interesting move by nVidia to send a G-Sync monitor... So to trade off the lackluster performance over the GTX980, they wanted to cover it up with a "smooth experience", huh? hahaha.

I'm impressed by their shenanigans. They up themselves each time.

In any case, at least this card looks fine for compute.

Cheers!

Paying almost double for a 30% increase in performance??? Shenanigans alright xD

Your surprised? Early adopters always pay the premium. I find it interesting you mention "almost every benchmark" when comparing this GPU to a dual GPU of last generation. Sounds impressive on a purely performance measure. I am not a fan of SLI but I suspect two of these would trounce anything around.

Either way the card is way out of my market but now that another card has taken top honors, maybe it will bleed the 970/980 prices down a little into my cheapskate hands.

Just because it's one gpu doesn't mean people should pay twice for less performance. If you can't see that than I honestly do not understand... And they're supposed ace in the hole is the 12 GB of vram and G-Sync performance, but for a "4k" card I for one and not impressed

that is from consumer perspective. but nvidia charging 1k because they think they can. in the end it is up to the person itself to think it is worth or not such price tag with the performance Titan X provide. nvidia is profit making company. same with AMD and intel. if it does not sell that well they might cut the price. just like the discount they give to system builder using Titan Z. same with AMD. they think 1500 is fantastic price for 295x2 (compared to 3k Titan Z). but as you can see now they are selling it for less than a half of it's original price. so why drop the price when Titan Z does not even compete with it price wise? most likely to encourage sales even if they have to cut the projected profit they can get with each 295x2 unit.

 

[Snookslayer]

I'm no expert, so someone please explain this to the laymen.

GTX 980 currently costs $500 or so for a NON-reference card.

GTX Titan X is projected to cost $1,000 for a reference card

Based on the benchmarks, the extra $500 gets you an extra 10-15 average fps.?. If that was true, how do they intend to sell any of those cards? I must be missing something...?

 

[renz496]

I'm no expert, so someone please explain this to the laymen.

GTX 980 currently costs $500 or so for a NON-reference card.

GTX Titan X is projected to cost $1,000 for a reference card

Based on the benchmarks, the extra $500 gets you an extra 10-15 average fps.?. If that was true, how do they intend to sell any of those cards? I must be missing something...?

just another crazy experiment by nvidia to see how people react to it? i mean with 980 and 970 they play both premium and bang for buck game at the same time. or they just want to milk the consumer before AMD retaliates with their R 300 series. right now nvidia sitting at very comfortable position in terms of discrete market share. it is almost to the point of intel domination in CPU against AMD.

 

[renz496]

nothing to see here. another epic fail

fail on that massive price but not on performance. now they able to cramp titan z performance into a single chip and consume a lot less with the same 28nm node used on GK110. that alone is no small feat. but nvidia going silly with the price is nothing new.

 

[renz496]

lol at some of you complaining about the cost of a professional card designed for double floating point numbers. it cost the same as the last titan… you cannot find a keplar titan for under $500 even now.

otherwise its a beast like we knew it would be, even at a paltry 1000mhz? show us the classified at 1400mhz.

except this new Titan X are not like the previous Titan in regards to DP. without the benefit of strong DP performance like Titan and Titan Black for what reason nvidia have to sell GM200 as titan? what factor will make Titan X different to regular geforce?
but one thing for sure 601mm2 chip are not going to be cheap to manufacture for nvidia.

 

[tomfreak]

did you read properly? on TITAN X FP64 is disabled, so pretty much is gaming card
just have same like GTX 980 and have bigger resources...

pls dont become brand victim...

that means this is an overpriced Gaming card THAT use a compute card brand name.

Hey dont blame me, that brand were marketed as compute card previously. A lot of Nvidia TITAN fans were trying to justify the previous TITAN selling point were all about DP performance. I guess they cannot use that reason this time. If AMD Fiji GPU beat this in compute(GCN architecture usually do), I guess there will be nothing much to offer from a TITAN other than that over size Vram.