Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6 GB: GK110 On A Gaming Card

[TheBigTroll]

$1000 for a card is ridiculous. IMO, a single 680gtx will satisfy 90% of all serious gamers out there, 2x680 will satisfy wealthy gamers with triple screens and this will still be just under $1000.

the 680 SLI isnt quite good enough for 3x 1080p panels. not enough vram and the 4gb editions cant make use of it

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]TheBigTroll[/nom]the 680 SLI isnt quite good enough for 3x 1080p panels. not enough vram and the 4gb editions cant make use of it[/citation]

Titan is still too expensive for that to make it a good value purely as a gaming card. Two 680 4GB cards in SLI would handle pretty much everything better than a single Titan so long as SLI is supported.

 

[TheBigTroll]

Titan is still too expensive for that to make it a good value purely as a gaming card.

i doubt it was meant for pure gaming. it can be used for compute for some people that dont want to pay the full bill for a tesla card

 

[blazorthon]

i doubt it was meant for pure gaming. it can be used for compute for some people that dont want to pay the full bill for a tesla card

You're absolutely correct about that, but that seems a little out of context in a gaming performance comparison.

 

[TheBigTroll]

You're absolutely correct about that, but that seems a little out of context in a gaming performance comparison.

true. it is rather expensive but then some people want the best of the best, and it will cost them

 

[krisom]

Disregarding electric bills and issues which you can have going SLI, I've got two 670s in SLI.
Would this be an upgrade or not in terms of performance?

From what I've seen in benchmarks, the 670SLI is around 3% slower than the 690.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]krisom[/nom]Disregarding electric bills and issues which you can have going SLI, I've got two 670s in SLI. Would this be an upgrade or not in terms of performance?From what I've seen in benchmarks, the 670SLI is around 3% slower than the 690.[/citation]

Titan would considered to be a significant downgrade for you if you believe current benches of it.

 

[redeemer]

A week worth of heavy compute and the Titan would literally pay for itself.

 

[Wisecracker]

A week worth of heavy compute and the Titan would literally pay for itself.

Compute of what?

 

[inkarnat3]

Current guesstimates with leaked benchmarks put the Titan somewhere between 30-50% faster than the 680. That's the problem with this card - it's paying 2.25 times more money for 1.3-1.5 times more performance.

Sorry for waiting for the Tom's benches, but you were absolutely correct. I am very disappointed in the performance of the Titan. Should be called a GTX 780 and have a $600-$650 price tag as far as I am concerned....

I guess I will wait and see if "the market corrects itself" and Titan's come down to a price more inline with their performance. Unless they come down to $600 - $650, my GTX 670 SLI stays :/

 

[Guest]

At first as I was excited, but looking at the stats and pricing, that excitement fizzled.

Nvidia is dead.

AMD is still king and is leap frogs ahead.

The partnership with the PS4 is proof enough.

A very satisifed 7970 owner.

 

[jaguarcd32x]

Yes a dual card can have frame timing issues but the 690 really doesn't have microstutter issues and runs at much higher frame rates anyway. For example 7970GHZ ED has way ,way worse frame latency timing issues than say the GTX690 and is made wore by the fact that it runs at slower frame rates than 690 so t's even more of an issue

 

[italia_nyc]

I don't know why people are saying the GTX 690 is so much cheaper than the Titan. The 690 still retails for $1000. The same exact price as the Titan. So what gives? What paper are you cats reading? Also, with all due respect, micro-stutter is largely a thing of the past. No one has seen or suffered from micro-stutter on any recent high-end video cards. Just doesn't exist. I personally have the 690, have it OC'd and as in past experiences, no signs of the 90's reference to micro-stutter.

 

[italia_nyc]

Not sure why everyone is here saying the 690 is so much cheaper than the Titan. The 690 still today retails for $1000. The same price as the Titan. Also, enough with micro-stutter argument. No one suffers from M-S today with a recent, high-end card. It's gone. Bye-bye. So please, enough with this 90's buzz word.

 

[ahnilated]

They finally go back to having a card that is a step up from the GTX 580 in number crunching after they stripped this out of the GTX 680 for their pocket books and now want to charge us $1000 for it? I think it is time to boycott Nvidia cards until they stop giving the customer the shaft in favor of their pocket books.

 

[youssef 2010]

I'll reserve judgement about the card until I see the benchmarks. But kudos to Nvidia for the cooling system

 

[hail]

RADEON 7970 GHZ vs TITAN.

I think I rather spend money on two RADEON 7970GHz or yet buy Geforce 690 which is same price as titan and yet gives much better performance. I think nVIDIA is just making money off poor gamers and hypo kids. I myself use MSI 680 and quite happy with it. I was planning to buy Titan but now I think I am about to spend my money on 690 instead.

 

[nokiddingboss]

for that introductory price of $1000, the titan is indeed overpriced and a little disappointing. but i think the price is going to come down once the titan matures in the market. i guessing that it'll at least drop down to a more manageable price of $600~$700 tops and will get better performance once the driver team of nvidia finally unlocks its full potential. but then again judging by the way amd's price drop for their gpu current lineup especially their 7970's (and should it drop to $350~$370ish), the titan will really find it hard to find a place on the market. still though, so much for those mumbling about the titan being superior to the 690 by any margin. time to look forward to the "real" gtx780 and see if it can deliver the goods titan promised (before anyone yaps about titan being gtx 780, titan is NOT gtx 780. its named gtx titan - look it up).

 

[Wisecracker]

for that introductory price of $1000, the titan is indeed overpriced and a little disappointing. but i think the price is going to come down once the titan matures in the market. ...

Titan will not be around. It's a one-off of re-tasked Tesla K20X that for whatever reason did not qualify for HPC

 

[cigarfan]

It seems to me that the real value of titan is to developers who were disappointed to find that the affordable [sub-$1000?] Kepler cards missed most of the new compute-related features. Titan seems to have the two most important items from an educational point of view: Dynamic Parallelism and HyperQ. The improved FP64 and memory size/speed are bonuses of course.
On that basis is is a good value. I plan on buying one or two when the availability improves.

 

[Stephen Bell]

This card will be kick-ass awesome for serious 3D work, and I don't mean games. OK, you can guy faster ones but 6 GB on one GPU means MASSIVE scenes. You wont hit that inevitable bottleneck when your scene no longer fits into the cards RAM and everything slows to a crawl. Considering its straight line drag race performance is better than it's professional ancestor it just makes perfect sense to choose this beast instead. The ECC will not be missed as we are just viewing the work as we do it, not crunching final render calculations.

Even with the 3GB single CPU card i have now I run out when my count of trees gets past half a million.

My work is going to speed up significantly, so it is firmly on this month's shopping list, maybe even two of them.

 

[jowunger]

I will get 2 Titans. Is all folks poor? jee...