Why the need for all these cards

[squidmam12]

So, I just saw the reveal video the Nvidia Titan Z. I really question why they make these cards in the first place. Anything reasonable can be achieved with a normal higher end GPU in almost every aspect. Gaming, editing, etc... Like a card like that, nothing would even remotely get close to its true potential of power for the next 20 years or so... WHY do they make such damn high end cards??!!!

 

[Junit151]

Well a 12GB super card would not be used for gaming, none of the titans should be used for gaming as a matter of fact. If you did a lot of rendering or 3D modeling, you would love to get this card. Imagine the difference in compute times for ray tracing on this vs the current Titan. Oh baby, give me all the VRAM... 😛 😀

 

[CoolVengeance]

Its only true use can be used by people like game developers and people along those lines

 

[anoori9000]

This card is for people that have multiple monitors, while running games at 5k resolution. Overall, nvidia wont make to much money on this card because it is not relevant at this point in time.

 

[Junit151]

Not. For. Gaming... ever! Not even once! Oh my god internet, stahp

 

[HiTechObsessed]

There are plenty of applications that could use the Titan Z. Just because you couldn't possibly use all of it doesn't mean there isn't an application for it. Five years ago, something like the 780 Ti would have been viewed as extremely overkill, now look at it. 4k brings it to its knees, even dual 780 Tis.

 

[anoori9000]

There are plenty of applications that could use the Titan Z. Just because you couldn't possibly use all of it doesn't mean there isn't an application for it. Five years ago, something like the 780 Ti would have been viewed as extremely overkill, now look at it. 4k brings it to its knees, even dual 780 Tis.

Like i said, "not relevant at this point in time."

 

[Junit151]

The reason it isn't for gaming is that unless you have a $12000 quad SLI setup, you don't have the GPU horsepower to push 12GB of VRAM anyway! Even 6GB video cards don't use all their RAM on 4K unless you have the AA up to 8X or 16X.

 

[Rationale]

Not "20" years. More like 5-7 years.

 

[cst1992]

@HiTechObsessed
Then there is no end to this, is there? I mean, if say the 980 releases in a couple of years, we'll be viewing it as overkill, but some 16k or some new display like that will repeat this story.

Do you guys think that displays will have a ceiling somewhere? I mean, when we had 1080p, a connection of a few(say 10) Mbps was enough to stream it. When 4k content launched, they had to provide bandwidth of 24 Gbps to stream it onto a display. Suppose 5 years later 16K requires a terabit connection, where are we going to get so much bandwidth? It'll literally end online movies if those displays become the norm.

 

[Rationale]

I have my doubts that people will be able to see a difference up to 16K. At a certain point, eyesight is just not that good.

 

[HiTechObsessed]

You're all looking at this card from a gaming perspective. It is NOT meant for the gaming sector at all. There are plenty of tasks where something like this would be perfect for.

And I have no clue where you got to talking about streaming for, since even a $75 GPU can display a 4k picture, graphics cards, ESPECIALLY THE TITAN Z, are certainly not made for watching movies. That argument makes no sense here.

 

[Deuce65]

Not. For. Gaming... ever! Not even once! Oh my god internet, stahp

Would you stop with this? Seriously, you keep saying it over and over again and it is simply wrong.

"...GeForce® GTX TITAN GPU is a revolution in PC gaming performance." That is the marketing blurb on Nvidia's website. Followed by a listing of it's performance specifications not in compute, but in games. Followed by it being compared to the performance of their other gaming cards not compute cards. And it uses the gaming drivers, not workstation. And is listed in the gaming section, not workstation. Etc Etc.

Nvidia obviously thinks they designed the card for gaming, so why would you say otherwise?

 

[Deuce65]

You're all looking at this card from a gaming perspective. It is NOT meant for the gaming sector at all. There are plenty of tasks where something like this would be perfect for.

This is the marketing blurb for the Titan Z:
"GeForce GTX TITAN Z is a gaming monster, built to power the most extreme gaming rigs on the planet. With a massive 5760 cores and 12 GB of 7 Gbps GDDR5 memory, TITAN Z gives you truly amazing performance—easily making it the fastest graphics card we’ve ever made.

This is a serious card built for serious gamers. TITAN Z is designed with the highest-grade components to deliver the best experience – incredible speed and cool, quiet performance—all in a stunningly crafted aluminum case."

 

[Deuce65]

The reason it isn't for gaming is that unless you have a $12000 quad SLI setup, you don't have the GPU horsepower to push 12GB of VRAM anyway! Even 6GB video cards don't use all their RAM on 4K unless you have the AA up to 8X or 16X.

It's 3000 dollars. 3000 dollars times 2 is 6000 dollars for Quad sli, not 12000. And you aren't pushing 12GB of VRAM, you're pushing 6GB. I realize now where your confusion is coming from, you simply don't know wtf you're talking about.

 

[CoolVengeance]

The reason it isn't for gaming is that unless you have a $12000 quad SLI setup, you don't have the GPU horsepower to push 12GB of VRAM anyway! Even 6GB video cards don't use all their RAM on 4K unless you have the AA up to 8X or 16X.

It's 3000 dollars. 3000 dollars times 2 is 6000 dollars for Quad sli, not 12000. And you aren't pushing 12GB of VRAM, you're pushing 6GB. I realize now where your confusion is coming from, you simply don't know wtf you're talking about.

2 graphics cards are in DUAL SLI, not in quad. Quad-=4

 

[Rationale]

The reason it isn't for gaming is that unless you have a $12000 quad SLI setup, you don't have the GPU horsepower to push 12GB of VRAM anyway! Even 6GB video cards don't use all their RAM on 4K unless you have the AA up to 8X or 16X.

It's 3000 dollars. 3000 dollars times 2 is 6000 dollars for Quad sli, not 12000. And you aren't pushing 12GB of VRAM, you're pushing 6GB. I realize now where your confusion is coming from, you simply don't know wtf you're talking about.

There is so much wrong with this.
Quad=4
Dual=2
Quad-SLI=$12000

Also, they are using 12GB on a 12GB card, not 6GB. SLI VRAM mirroring doesn't cut VRAM in half, it simply stops it from increasing with additional cards.

 

[paitjsu sadff]

my first graphics card was a 3dfx monster 3d with 4 megabytes (YES 4 MEGABYTES...not Gigabytes you read that correctly) and at the time i bought the card it was COMPLETELY and UTERLY overkill...yet some months later down the road it was just barely enough to play monster truck madness 2...WHAAAAAAAAAAT!!!!! ....some people play on 3 screens and even for 4k resolution those cards are not even up to the task in some latest games like metro LL and crysis 3...im more wondering why at the time we speak WHY they still make GTX 770 with only 2gb of vram on them...

 

[CoolVengeance]

my first graphics card was a 3dfx monster 3d with 4 megabytes (YES 4 MEGABYTES...not Gigabytes you read that correctly) and at the time i bought the card it was COMPLETELY and UTERLY overkill...yet some months later down the road it was just barely enough to play monster truck madness 2...WHAAAAAAAAAAT!!!!! ....some people play on 3 screens and even for 4k resolution those cards are not even up to the task in some latest games like metro LL and crysis 3...im more wondering why at the time we speak WHY they still make GTX 770 with only 2gb of vram on them...

They only release 2gb vram for people with a single monitor setup because you don't need a WHOLE lot of vram. Most games dont even use 2gb but they are getting close.

 

[paitjsu sadff]

my first graphics card was a 3dfx monster 3d with 4 megabytes (YES 4 MEGABYTES...not Gigabytes you read that correctly) and at the time i bought the card it was COMPLETELY and UTERLY overkill...yet some months later down the road it was just barely enough to play monster truck madness 2...WHAAAAAAAAAAT!!!!! ....some people play on 3 screens and even for 4k resolution those cards are not even up to the task in some latest games like metro LL and crysis 3...im more wondering why at the time we speak WHY they still make GTX 770 with only 2gb of vram on them...

They only release 2gb vram for people with a single monitor setup because you don't need a WHOLE lot of vram. Most games dont even use 2gb but they are getting close.

some games do (Bf4, titanfail) and don't forget that the new consoles have plenty of ram available they got 8gb shared memory so they could use like 4 or 6 gb for VRAM easily and i would not be surprised at all if the next AAA titles would use 3 to 4 gb on PC...it is said that watch dogs for example will peak at around 3gb on max settings...already!

 

[CoolVengeance]

my first graphics card was a 3dfx monster 3d with 4 megabytes (YES 4 MEGABYTES...not Gigabytes you read that correctly) and at the time i bought the card it was COMPLETELY and UTERLY overkill...yet some months later down the road it was just barely enough to play monster truck madness 2...WHAAAAAAAAAAT!!!!! ....some people play on 3 screens and even for 4k resolution those cards are not even up to the task in some latest games like metro LL and crysis 3...im more wondering why at the time we speak WHY they still make GTX 770 with only 2gb of vram on them...

They only release 2gb vram for people with a single monitor setup because you don't need a WHOLE lot of vram. Most games dont even use 2gb but they are getting close.

some games do (Bf4, titanfail) and don't forget that the new consoles have plenty of ram available they got 8gb shared memory so they could use like 4 or 6 gb for VRAM easily and i would not be surprised at all if the next AAA titles would use 3 to 4 gb on PC...it is said that watch dogs for example will peak at around 3gb on max settings...already!

The 700 series was released a year ago.
That was the standard at the time. Hopefully the 800 series will have 3-4 vram was the standard

 

[Rationale]

I'll be upgrading my GTX 660 to a GTX 860 when the time comes, hopefully with at least 3GB of VRAM. This is a pretty regular cycle for me. Before I had a 660 I had a 460. About every 2 card generations the performance has improved enough to justify an upgrade.

 

[paitjsu sadff]

my first graphics card was a 3dfx monster 3d with 4 megabytes (YES 4 MEGABYTES...not Gigabytes you read that correctly) and at the time i bought the card it was COMPLETELY and UTERLY overkill...yet some months later down the road it was just barely enough to play monster truck madness 2...WHAAAAAAAAAAT!!!!! ....some people play on 3 screens and even for 4k resolution those cards are not even up to the task in some latest games like metro LL and crysis 3...im more wondering why at the time we speak WHY they still make GTX 770 with only 2gb of vram on them...

They only release 2gb vram for people with a single monitor setup because you don't need a WHOLE lot of vram. Most games dont even use 2gb but they are getting close.

some games do (Bf4, titanfail) and don't forget that the new consoles have plenty of ram available they got 8gb shared memory so they could use like 4 or 6 gb for VRAM easily and i would not be surprised at all if the next AAA titles would use 3 to 4 gb on PC...it is said that watch dogs for example will peak at around 3gb on max settings...already!

The 700 series was released a year ago.
That was the standard at the time. Hopefully the 800 series will have 3-4 vram was the standard

indeed they probably will...im glad i went with a GTX780 3gb that way i can supersample bf4 to 125% and use 2250mb of vram !

 

[CoolVengeance]

my first graphics card was a 3dfx monster 3d with 4 megabytes (YES 4 MEGABYTES...not Gigabytes you read that correctly) and at the time i bought the card it was COMPLETELY and UTERLY overkill...yet some months later down the road it was just barely enough to play monster truck madness 2...WHAAAAAAAAAAT!!!!! ....some people play on 3 screens and even for 4k resolution those cards are not even up to the task in some latest games like metro LL and crysis 3...im more wondering why at the time we speak WHY they still make GTX 770 with only 2gb of vram on them...

They only release 2gb vram for people with a single monitor setup because you don't need a WHOLE lot of vram. Most games dont even use 2gb but they are getting close.

some games do (Bf4, titanfail) and don't forget that the new consoles have plenty of ram available they got 8gb shared memory so they could use like 4 or 6 gb for VRAM easily and i would not be surprised at all if the next AAA titles would use 3 to 4 gb on PC...it is said that watch dogs for example will peak at around 3gb on max settings...already!

The 700 series was released a year ago.
That was the standard at the time. Hopefully the 800 series will have 3-4 vram was the standard

indeed they probably will...im glad i went with a GTX780 3gb that way i can supersample bf4 to 125% and use 2250mb of vram !

I am using a 770 2gb and that is plenty for me
I dont really plan on going any further than 1080p gaming for the time of being

 

[Rationale]

After seeing the minor difference from 1080p to 1440p, and seeing the obscene performance required to run 4K, I've pretty much decided to stay at 1080p/30fps for a while. More than that is just not worthwhile on a mid-range card when the extra performance could go towards better physics and effects.