Report: Nvidia GK110 Titan GPU to be Available Next Month

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
I want to see some benchmarks of how this will compare to the GTX680. Also, do they have any specifics on a reference model as far as dimensions, amount or RAM, etc? Or are they just teasing us?
 
Well Nvidia is so far ahead at this point - they can afford to demand whatever absurd amound of money they like...
 
[citation][nom]vmem[/nom]looks impressive on paper... but this is what the 680 was supposed to be, and now it's being sold at a ripoff $900... CMON AMD, YOU'RE FAILING US!!![/citation]

AMD is failing us? If that's the case, why are the majority of GPUs in this months recommendation list Radeon cards? (Nearly) Everything above the $200 price point is recommended to be Radeon, not a GeForce card.
 
I wouldn't be surprised if they named it "GeForce GTX 685". Similar to how they named the 280/285 cards.

I can see this being very popular with people who do folding. It won't be worth the price for gaming though. 2 670's or 7970's will run you around $800 and 2 680's will be around $900-950.
 
In a couple years after the next generation of kiddie consoles release and they finally start writing games that can actually utilize all the power this card has it should be reasonably priced by then.
 
I wish people would stop it with the " this card was SUPPOSED to be the 680" crap. This monster was overdesigned wishful thinking that ultimately proved too costly from the get-go. If you need further convincing, flagship products are not produced in limited runs. That is the job of a "limited edition" card.
 
Hopefully AMD will grace us with the 88-series in early March, as they did with the 78-series last year. I'm sure there are people who can afford these $900 GPUs, but I'm not one of them...
 
Maybe they think that calling it the 685 wouldn't do it justice.

I also wonder why they went with such low clock speeds and TDP, unless they're already planning a 450W MegaTitan...
 
The specs are ok.
But as said if you are planning to blow $900 thinking it will play games, forget it.
If your number crunching then fair enough. Obviously marketed for Mid range businesses in the market for a bit of Gpu number crunching small data centers ect.
 
[citation][nom]Soda-88[/nom]So this is what the original 680 should have been had the 7970 performed 50% better at launch...[/citation]
I heard the same thing way back at the time. The 680 was rumoured to be positively mid-range. I read that the 4870 was AMD's equivalent back in the day - mid-range yet good enough to compete at the higher end. The two firms have literally traded postures over the past year.

The low clock speed of Titan might actually work against it in shader-light games, but you can't take anything away from the fact that this is a gaming monster. 1TFLOP F64 is roughly the same as the 7970, though I expect NVIDIA to make better use of their hardware. Still, the 8970 - with its supposed 5 billion transistors - can't be too far off, so AMD might regain the lead in compute, but they've got to price it right to keep people interested.
 
[citation][nom]weaselman[/nom]The specs are ok.But as said if you are planning to blow $900 thinking it will play games, forget it.If your number crunching then fair enough. Obviously marketed for Mid range businesses in the market for a bit of Gpu number crunching small data centers ect.[/citation]
This isn't the workstation card.
 
The Tesla K20X runs at 732 MHz, and has 6GB of GDDR5 in a 384-bit bus at 5.2 GHz. Every other article I've read has explicitly stated those specs for the Tesla K20X, and not the Geforce Titan. The source seems suspect, and might be confusing the specs of the Tesla K20X for those of the upcoming Geforce card.

But in any case, if the rumors are true then the price is too high. If they're going to charge that much for this card, I sure hope the don't severely gimp the DP performance. The gk110 can run at 1/3 SP. If this card runs at anything less than 1/6, I probably won't even consider it. Regardless it should do a lot better in compute than the rest of the 600 series.
 
This is only an increase in shader power of ~ 27% ([2688/1536]*[732/1006]=1.27x) and an increase in RAM bandwidth of ~ 30% ([384/256]*[5.2/6]). How is this supposed to be more than 50% (assume gtx 690 is 80% faster than the 680 [no cpu bottlenecks]--0.80*0.85= 68%) faster than the gtx 680?
 
They should call it the 685 3D SurroundView edition. The only perf numbers we don't see on THG are for high-end with 3D. I wish that would change. ATM, no one can get insight into how much HW is really required for such a setup - they just know that they need a lot.
 
Pretty much pointless for the vast majority of users and gamers, I wouldn't fap to this at all unlike most that already bought into the hype. Personally I would avoid buying any thing Nvidia until after the new prices and the Radeon 8k series has hit the scene.

Expect the consumer versions GTX7xx to have fewers active shader cores and higher TDP. If there is any consolidation the consumer GTX version could be clocked 800-875mhz (with 275-300W TDP) but that is as good as it will get till Maxwell.
 
[citation][nom]WithoutWeakness[/nom]I wouldn't be surprised if they named it "GeForce GTX 685". Similar to how they named the 280/285 cards.I can see this being very popular with people who do folding. It won't be worth the price for gaming though. 2 670's or 7970's will run you around $800 and 2 680's will be around $900-950.[/citation]

Depends on the type of folding. But for Bitcoin and compute, this won't be able to touch a 7970.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom