Radeon R9 295X2 vs Nvidia Titan Z

[kalijaga]

Hi memhorder,

I do not know about the titan z or titan black, or any titans for that matter, but the 295x2 runs hot but the beauty is that the card vents the heat via rads outside. Thus the room becomes hot. Personally my cards will go to the limit of 75c and throttle down, in a room with ambient temp of 32-34C running bf4, tomb raider or anything that utilise the all the GPUs.
My MSI twin forzr 780 sli runs to a max of 75C but never throttles, so I imagine the titans will be hotter but will not throttle down as well.
I think anand is running an open bench rig and ambient temp is much lower.

 

[Baumy15]

The TITAN Z is basically two TITAN BLACKs in SLI while the R9 295X2 is two R9 290Xs in crossfire. This means that the TITAN Z is the most powerful GPU out of the two. The reason the AMD is said to be the fastest on the market is because the TITAN Z is not out yet.

So basically the Nvidia one is more powerful, but the AMD one gives you better bang for your buck.

only problem with that is the titan z is 3000 dollars and the 295x2 is 1500 dollars so you can get 2 295x2 for the price of one titan z so no mater what way you look at it the 295x2 is more powerful.

 

[mordorrson]

Hi memhorder,

I do not know about the titan z or titan black, or any titans for that matter, but the 295x2 runs hot but the beauty is that the card vents the heat via rads outside. Thus the room becomes hot. Personally my cards will go to the limit of 75c and throttle down, in a room with ambient temp of 32-34C running bf4, tomb raider or anything that utilise the all the GPUs.
My MSI twin forzr 780 sli runs to a max of 75C but never throttles, so I imagine the titans will be hotter but will not throttle down as well.
I think anand is running an open bench rig and ambient temp is much lower.

Dude, the radiator is attached to a closed loop liquid cooling system, not an air system. The 295X2 peaks at 67 C until you OC it, the Titan Z can get up to 85 C. They benchmarked it by measuring the die's actual temp while stressing it. You can check the temp benchmarks that Tom's has too. (2014 Graphics Cards performance charts).

 

[Eduello]

The TITAN Z is basically two TITAN BLACKs in SLI while the R9 295X2 is two R9 290Xs in crossfire. This means that the TITAN Z is the most powerful GPU out of the two. The reason the AMD is said to be the fastest on the market is because the TITAN Z is not out yet.

So basically the Nvidia one is more powerful, but the AMD one gives you better bang for your buck.

only problem with that is the titan z is 3000 dollars and the 295x2 is 1500 dollars so you can get 2 295x2 for the price of one titan z so no mater what way you look at it the 295x2 is more powerful.

I posted that well before the release of the Titan Z, it was all just speculation.

 

[Embra]

A Titan Z Review:
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/nvidia_geforce_gtx_titan_z_review,1.html

 

[cjkupers]

The TITAN Z is basically two TITAN BLACKs in SLI while the R9 295X2 is two R9 290Xs in crossfire. This means that the TITAN Z is the most powerful GPU out of the two. The reason the AMD is said to be the fastest on the market is because the TITAN Z is not out yet.

So basically the Nvidia one is more powerful, but the AMD one gives you better bang for your buck.

only problem with that is the titan z is 3000 dollars and the 295x2 is 1500 dollars so you can get 2 295x2 for the price of one titan z so no mater what way you look at it the 295x2 is more powerful.

Seriously? I want you to read what you just wrote. Being able to buy two cards for the price of one does not make that card more powerful!

This is the sort of ignorance that irritates me.

If you wish to objectively compare the two cards, IGNORE THE PRICE POINTS.

They are both priced at obscene and arbitrary levels! Focus on the actual performance! Its not like anyone here will actually buy them either way.

I explained this earlier.

First, please look at the bare bones numbers. You'll realize that the cards almost equally match up, except the ATI card has a faster pixel rate and has better float-point performance. The nvidia card has loads better memory performance, and in the end will perform better in games + a wider spectrum of applications requiring 3D rendering.

As I said before, when it comes to these two cards, the performance will come down to the CODING API THAT IS THE FOUNDATION FOR THESE GPUS.

And if you haven't read about GCN, Mantle, Nvidia's API, OpenGl and DirectX and how they are translated to calls that the GPUs can communicate through, as well as Nvidia's card abilities to allow the CPU to deploy a child kernel onboard, you'll realize how much better the Nvidia card will be in the long run.

If ATI steps up their game and produces a much more robust and widely-used API (which probably wont happen because of the "network effect"... google it) We will still continue to have games and applications developed with Nvidia's architecture and API at the forefront of the developer world.



Its kind of like explaining to a child the difference between Volts, Amperes, and Watts.

Watts is a measurement of power. It's pretty much Volts X Amps.

Imagine Volts is the speed of which the water flows through a pipe, while Amps is the diameter and therefore the volume of which the pipe can flow.

Now, to apply this analogy so you can understand, think of the ATI card as having a screaming fast processing unit, that consumes a lot more energy, able to dump out a lot of calculations into a pipe that isnt very large, nor very fast. It's like a super genius working alone at a factory that puts his product on a conveyor belt, but the belt is very slow, and very very very small.

In opposition to that, you have Nvidia, which produces the card which has an insanely fast and large pipe, which can DELIVER a lot more processed data and faster while burning less energy, and instead of using "one super genious" it uses many many many smaller, but still quick and smart worker bees.

ON TOP of that, Nvidia's API is much more advanced, more widely used, and is the current industry standard marker for producing/developing game engines that work well for rendering under DirectX 11/12 and OpenGL 4.x+.

READ about the technology behind these cards! I would say ATI is in the dark ages, like back when Intel was still producing the Intel Pentium 4 Extreme Edition! screaming fast processor, but power hungry, hot, and only TWO THREADS. That's what I compare the 295x2 to. It's a fast GPU, don't get me wrong, but they've built it in a way where that power is not utilized most efficiently, and not bridled in to its full potential by the underlying software that drives it.

The Nvidia card is refined, uses less power, stays on par with its opponent, while still OUTPERFORMING it in the more common application.

Please do not get me wrong, I have been a proud owner of both ATI and Nvidia products. I was extremely pleased with the days of the HD 7770 Black Edition (Ghz edition) cards that STILL keep up with today's newer cards in gaming application while keeping a low ~$100 price point. But I also know where the brand leads strong, and where it doesn't lead at all.

You want a good budget card that will last you a while and still keep up while you slowly dial back the quality settings in your games? Go with a cheaper more budgetable ATI card. They're affordable for a GOOD REASON.

Want the most bleeding edge visual experience for a premium dollar, in a more refined and polished end product? Go with the Nvidia card. But remember, premium has a price.

TLDR?

Z > 295x2

I have provided a lot of reasons that are solid and are true, you can google and read up on the technology behind the Kepler and (insert random island name here) architectures. Believe me, if you want an in-your-face experience of what I'm talking about, try installing any Linux distro on your system, install the base proprietary drivers that do not include any BS bells and whistles, and run any Source engine game with OpenGL, or run an UT2004 Engine based game with OpenGL. max them out. write down the frames. You will understand the difference.

 

[cjkupers]

Nvidia Z:
Better PERFORMANCE
Lower energy cost
Better API/Drivers

ATI 295x2:
Lower Idle temp via stock coolers that vent out backwards. (cooler card, hotter room at a faster rate)

 

[Someone Somewhere]

Disagree; specs are useless except for comparing within architecture; benchmarks (and the frame rates, variance etc from them) are all that matter.

Can't be bothered writing a response to that pile of mild misconceptions.

 

[cjkupers]

Fine, then compare the base card benchmarks. http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Radeon-R9-290X-vs-GeForce-GTX-TITAN

290x beats the titan in 3DMark '11 because of its superior float point calculation performance.

If people understood how these cards actually worked, knowing which one will perform better for what they're using it for would not be decided by a fanboy flamewar.

Either way, a Titan Z would most definitely still beat a 295x2.

Specs are NOT useless. If you know how it works, you'll know which card will do better for which benchmark and therefore which application you're running.

 

[CAaronD]

GPUboss is mostly a Nvidia biased website, don't use it. They often boost the Nvidia cards tons! Better to check individual reviews. Also doesn't the R9 295x2 perform 20% better than two of the R9 290x in crossfire?

 

[mordorrson]

The GTX Titan isn't the base card for the Titan Z... Also, GPU boss has the comparison for the actual cards, although I would take it with a grain of salt, as their comparisons show fanboyism in favor of Nvidia quite a bit. Half the time the benchmarks aren't even the same as the sources they claimed to get them from. And no, a Titan Z won't "most definitely" beat a 295X2. Which card performs better depends (almost) entirely on which card the game being played is optimized for. You might be forgetting the fact that the Titan Z will only perform as well as it's 83 C throttle lets it, whereas the cooler on the 295X2 lets it push both GPUs to their maximum potential within stock clock (and some overclocking) speeds. Also, figuring out which card performs better isn't decided by flamewars, it's decided by the benchmarks that you seem to be in disagreement with.

 

[Someone Somewhere]

Yeah, the Titan Z is underclocked compared to the Titan Black. 295X2 is overclocked compared to the 290X.

GPUBoss is still rubbish.

 

[Embra]

GPUBoss is rubbish. Let's stop using it. Benchmarks in gaming is what everyone wants. Price/performance should be the comparison.
The Titan Z is a fail because of price. Period.

 

[CAaronD]

Mordorrson LOL! "Fanboyism" xD Well I guess if people wanted a ultra computer and they didn't give shits about money, for gaming I suppose dual R9 295x2s? And for a workstation Dual Titan Zs?

 

[Neil Dangat]

if you would all refer to my post on the first page of this thread, that solved everything you are already arguing over, you would see that i stated, that due to better cooling, the the R9 295X2 has better cooling than 2x R9 290X and is therfore overclocked in comparison, and the TITAN Z cooler has marginally more cooling power than the TITAN BLACK and therfore has both gpus underclocked, which is why the R9 295X2 gets 11.5 terraflops, and the TITAN Z only gets 8 terraflops, therfore making the R9 295X2 the fastest card

 

[TehCaucasianAsian]

I googled "Titan Z vs R9 295 X2" and literally EVERY site on the first results page was talking about how the AMD card either matched or beat the nVidia in every gaming benchmark. Does that mean the AMD card is better? Not quite. It sucks a lot more power (relative to computer parts. ~100 more watts really isn't that big of a deal. It also has a water cooler, which takes up a space for a regular 120MM case fan. These cons aren't that big of a deal for most, but could potentially be deal breakers for a select few. However, the Titan Z is underclocked compared to the single GPUs it's based on, whereas water cooling enabled AMD to actually OVERclock the GPUs and have them run 20 degrees LOWER than even a SINGLE 290X. That's impressive on its own. The AMD also manages to be dual slot while the Z is triple slot. Let's not forget that the AMD is half the price of the nVidia. Seeing as both cards are marketed currently as gaming beasts, the R9 295X2 is the obvious winner. BUT if the Titan Z was marketed for workstation usage it would make more sense, though still be overpriced. IMHO, the R9 295X2 is better overall, with the Titan Z having the advantage of CUDA performance on its side. Still not worth the money, though.

 

[Neil Dangat]

I googled "Titan Z vs R9 295 X2" and literally EVERY site on the first results page was talking about how the AMD card either matched or beat the nVidia in every gaming benchmark. Does that mean the AMD card is better? Not quite. It sucks a lot more power (relative to computer parts. ~100 more watts really isn't that big of a deal. It also has a water cooler, which takes up a space for a regular 120MM case fan. These cons aren't that big of a deal for most, but could potentially be deal breakers for a select few. However, the Titan Z is underclocked compared to the single GPUs it's based on, whereas water cooling enabled AMD to actually OVERclock the GPUs and have them run 20 degrees LOWER than even a SINGLE 290X. That's impressive on its own. The AMD also manages to be dual slot while the Z is triple slot. Let's not forget that the AMD is half the price of the nVidia. Seeing as both cards are marketed currently as gaming beasts, the R9 295X2 is the obvious winner. BUT if the Titan Z was marketed for workstation usage it would make more sense, though still be overpriced. IMHO, the R9 295X2 is better overall, with the Titan Z having the advantage of CUDA performance on its side. Still not worth the money, though.

if you would all refer to my post on the first page of this thread, that solved everything you are already arguing over, that due to better cooling, the the R9 295X2 has better cooling than 2x R9 290X and is therfore overclocked in comparison, and the TITAN Z cooler has marginally more cooling power than the TITAN BLACK and therfore has both gpus underclocked, which is why the R9 295X2 gets 11.5 terraflops, and the TITAN Z only gets 8 terraflops, therfore making the R9 295X2 the fastest card. even though the 780ti, and the 290x are tied

 

[smeezekitty]

If you wish to objectively compare the two cards, IGNORE THE PRICE POINTS.

I disagree. Price to performance is a very important aspect and cards should be compared to ones at a similar price point

 

[TehCaucasianAsian]

Price to performance is why I bought an R9 270 over a GTX 660. For the $169 I spent vs the $210 my friend spent on a 660, they get SO pissed that I can match or beat their gaming performance. Price to performance is huge

 

[hmurphy123]

If Price to performance is what you are looking for then AMD will win at the moment. But nvidia is most likely going to bring down the price for the Titan Z to compete with the 295. But the original user asked which card is better performing. Therefore the price to performance is irrelevant. Furthermore give nvidia a month or so and i can almost guarantee they will bring the price down. I believe that htye brought the price for the 780 down to compete with the 290 and 290x

 

[kalijaga]

Hi memhorder,

I do not know about the titan z or titan black, or any titans for that matter, but the 295x2 runs hot but the beauty is that the card vents the heat via rads outside. Thus the room becomes hot. Personally my cards will go to the limit of 75c and throttle down, in a room with ambient temp of 32-34C running bf4, tomb raider or anything that utilise the all the GPUs.
My MSI twin forzr 780 sli runs to a max of 75C but never throttles, so I imagine the titans will be hotter but will not throttle down as well.
I think anand is running an open bench rig and ambient temp is much lower.

Dude, the radiator is attached to a closed loop liquid cooling system, not an air system. The 295X2 peaks at 67 C until you OC it, the Titan Z can get up to 85 C. They benchmarked it by measuring the die's actual temp while stressing it. You can check the temp benchmarks that Tom's has too. (2014 Graphics Cards performance charts).

Thanks dude,
but the cards max at 75C even at stock speed. And I have personally reached this limit many times on both my MSI and Sapphire 295x2. I have no FLIR camera or even a IR temp reader but I can tell you the heat is significant even in my room. As I said the beauty is that the heat gets out while the titan being air cooled , heat the case more.

Cheers.

 

[nikoli707]

this isnt even an arguement. the titan z holds the single card 3dmark world record over the 295x2... but you pay stupid money for it, and on top of that, 2 780ti kingpins under great water will cost you about $2000, and still beat the titan z easily, minus the double precision floating point. anybody who actually needs the non gaming performance should be looking at the the 295x2 if you need a small form factor, and if you want real gaming performance, under water, neither the titan z or 295x2 are an option unless you are doing a min/micro atx form factor. after that, even the most basic case can house two separate gpu's, with pcb's(hawaii or gk110), which almost all models with custom pcb designs with vastly better voltage controllers, mosfets, vrms, and caps, will very simply just murder both dual gpu cards under water at the same temps.

 

[TehCaucasianAsian]

this isnt even an arguement. the titan z holds the single card 3dmark world record over the 295x2... but you pay stupid money for it, and on top of that, 2 780ti kingpins under great water will cost you about $2000, and still beat the titan z easily, minus the double precision floating point. anybody who actually needs the non gaming performance should be looking at the the 295x2 if you need a small form factor, and if you want real gaming performance, under water, neither the titan z or 295x2 are an option unless you are doing a min/micro atx form factor. after that, even the most basic case can house two separate gpu's, with pcb's(hawaii or gk110), which almost all models with custom pcb designs with vastly better voltage controllers, mosfets, vrms, and caps, will very simply just murder both dual gpu cards under water at the same temps.

For lazy people, the dual card solutions seem to be the better choice. Like the R9 295X2 is already Water cooled and runs fairly cool, and takes up little space. It's easier then getting your own cooling solution and is quieter

 

[Memhorder]

Hi memhorder,

I do not know about the titan z or titan black, or any titans for that matter, but the 295x2 runs hot but the beauty is that the card vents the heat via rads outside. Thus the room becomes hot. Personally my cards will go to the limit of 75c and throttle down, in a room with ambient temp of 32-34C running bf4, tomb raider or anything that utilise the all the GPUs.
My MSI twin forzr 780 sli runs to a max of 75C but never throttles, so I imagine the titans will be hotter but will not throttle down as well.
I think anand is running an open bench rig and ambient temp is much lower.

Yeah that is 10 to 14 degrees higher. Gee that's a hot room. You should look into air conditioning You got some pretty expensive hardware. What kind of monitors do you have to push em and have you taken frame rates for both the 780's and 295x? Are the 780's better?

 

[kalijaga]

Hi memhorder,

I do not know about the titan z or titan black, or any titans for that matter, but the 295x2 runs hot but the beauty is that the card vents the heat via rads outside. Thus the room becomes hot. Personally my cards will go to the limit of 75c and throttle down, in a room with ambient temp of 32-34C running bf4, tomb raider or anything that utilise the all the GPUs.
My MSI twin forzr 780 sli runs to a max of 75C but never throttles, so I imagine the titans will be hotter but will not throttle down as well.
I think anand is running an open bench rig and ambient temp is much lower.

Yeah that is 10 to 14 degrees higher. Gee that's a hot room. You should look into air conditioning You got some pretty expensive hardware. What kind of monitors do you have to push em and have you taken frame rates for both the 780's and 295x? Are the 780's better?

I have air conditioning but in a different room, I am planning to move the rigs but awaiting the go ahead from the boss. (you know what I mean right?).
the two 780s are running dell u2713hm at 1440p. it is about the sweet spot for it, maxing all setting most of the time.
the 295x2s are running sammy ud590 at 4k. it is a problem magnet most of the time but when running well, eg BF3, BF4, ghosts, bioshock, tomb raider ...goshhhhh 4k gaming need to be seen to be believed.
And all this coming from a gtx 680 running a 1080p 2 years ago...

Honestly, my experience on gaming in summary:

Smooth gaming 680(1080p)>780 sli(1440p)> 295x2 CF(4k)
FPS and problems : 295x2 CF>780sli>680

It is however difficult to go back to 1080p when you have tasted 4k or even 1440p.

Good day and good luck.