Anyone buying a Titan?

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

dangerman1337

Senior member
Sep 16, 2010
333
5
81
If was in the market for a high-end GPU, Titan wouldn't look attractive to me. If Nvidia set a 3GB version of this for 700USD (whatever that would be in £ in the UK) then it would look a great choice but 1000USD/830GBP for a 6GB? Nope. I would rather wait for Maxwell or Volcanic Islands but I'm not sure if those will come out in 2014 since Apple probably going to be a greedy pig.

Not saying its a bad product but it just looks too overpriced for what it is.
 
Last edited:

Elfear

Diamond Member
May 30, 2004
7,096
640
126
Have you seen an optometrist? I thought you said you rarely play games anyways?

As a matter of fact I have seen an optometrist in the last couple months. My 20/20 vision must be subpar to your eagle eyes I guess.

I don't game as much as the guys who play 2-3hrs a day. Probably more like 6-9hrs a week.

Damage control mode enabled.

Do you guys ever get tried of trying to make excuses for AMD's drivers?

Titan is extremely overpriced and CF is a non option, let's just try being honest with ourselves.

Who is making excuses? There is definitely room for improvement with AMD drivers but it is a far cry from the gouge-fest you make it out to be. Besides a few small issues I've really enjoyed gaming with Trifire. It allows settings that are no way possible on a single card.

Didn't the same review sites you're quoting also show Fermi with a lot of frame latency issues? When asked about it in another thread you said you were satisfied with your own testing thank you very much. So somehow you ignore their findings based on your own experience but my experience is somehow invalidated?
 

VulgarDisplay

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2009
6,193
2
76
I'm probably going to order a Titan. I'm tired of dealing with the issues of my tri-crossfire 6950 setup. Eventually I plan on ordering a second Titan (and maybe a third later).

For the love of God just buy two gtx670's instead of one titan if you are tied of xfire. It would be faster an cheaper.
 

AdamK47

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
15,168
2,829
126
I went to Micro Center on my lunch break today to see if they had the Titan. They didn't, but they did look it up in their backend system.

I saw the price... $1199.99 for the Evga and $1149.99 for the Asus!

I laughed and walked away. I'm sticking with my two GTX 690s if places do indeed try to sell them at that price. Sheesh!
 

Puppies04

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2011
5,909
17
76
I wouldn't even consider buying titan unless I needed...

A. more performance than anything else but it had to be a single card solution.

B. Tri SLI titans.
 

lavaheadache

Diamond Member
Jan 28, 2005
6,893
14
81
I would buy the card but definately not at the price they are asking. If it were $699 it would be hard for me to resist but that isn't the case
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
No way I'd buy Titan. I understand the premium for a high end product, but I think Titan does too little to really pull away from the pack (from a gamer's perspective).

I would likely be much better served by taking the money for a Titan card and buying an i5, motherboard, DDR3, another 7970, some games, plus a tank of gas to get all of those things. :)
 

kami

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
17,627
5
81
I'm not a synthetic benchmarks guy really... I just like games to be playable at max settings. My single 680 does that, even at 2560x1440. The only exception is crysis 3 right now, but I'm not upgrading (or going SLI) for just one game. Well, it's still playable since I'm playing it ;) just not quite as smooth as I'd like.

I look at the list of games coming out this year and what I'll be playing...and I'm pretty sure I won't need to think about a new video card until 2014. :) Right now the majority of my time is spent playing Blizzard games (680 is overkill for those) and Skyrim modded to hell and back, which runs perfectly smooth at 1440p. Bioshock Infinite I'm pretty sure isn't going to be that demanding... Elder Scrolls Online (later in the year supposedly) also won't need anything better.

I do like the idea of a really fast single GPU card, but not at that price...
 
Last edited:

RussianSensation

Elite Member
Sep 5, 2003
19,458
765
126
According to some other sites the average difference is even less, in computerbase.de tests titan is only 22% faster on average then 7970GE at 2560x1600 with MSAA/AF, with some good OC on 7970 you can match that. 1300MHz on the core isn't exactly unheard of.

I didn't even bother stating 22% faster since you know it's just going to be ignored with claims of 40-50% faster thrown in out of thin air.

Wouldn't hardcore PC gamers care the most about Titan's performance in graphically demanding games like Witcher 2, Metro 2033, Crysis 3, Sleeping Dogs with high AA, because that really shows us the potential of this card to handle more demanding next gen titles. No one is upgrading for AC3 or BL2 or WOW. And here is where the Titan falls apart the most for the price. Those scores are embarrassing for a $1000 videocard compared to a GTX690!!!

The only exception is crysis 3 right now, but I'm not upgrading (or going SLI) for just one game. Well, it's still playable since I'm playing it ;) just not quite as smooth as I'd like.

And that's the problem with the Titan. It doesn't even perform well in Crysis 3, one of the games someone might have wanted to splurge for.

crysis3titanfail.jpg

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/grafikkarten/2013/test-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan/17/

I would buy the card but definately not at the price they are asking. If it were $699 it would be hard for me to resist but that isn't the case

That would have been an amazing price. All NV would have needed was drop the VRAM to 3GB, reduce DP to 1/24th, get rid of that expensive cooler and just let AIBs design after-market open air designs. The card would have sold very well at $700 and given NV very positive publicity it needed. Now it made the competing product look even better (gasp!) in the eyes of gamers who don't really care for DP, unlike the few guys that do.
 
Last edited:

SolMiester

Diamond Member
Dec 19, 2004
5,331
17
76
The problem here is you and most others who make such claims/analogies do so using simple and wrong logic. Your analogy assumes AMD driver are always broken and never work.

AMD driver do not always = fail
Nvidia driver do not always = win

In my GTX 6x0 vs HD 79x0 experience Nvidia have actually fared no better than AMD in fixing issues. Serious vsync stutter plagued my GTX 680 for around 4-5 months. That is an experience that seriously soured Nvidia drivers for me.

You are welcome to your opinions, I don't think I'm wrong and neither do thousand of other users....NV has a much better polished software team period...that doesn't mean they don't make mistakes, just fewer of them.
 

BallaTheFeared

Diamond Member
Nov 15, 2010
8,115
0
71
They live in dream world where $ doesn't matter for 20-30 more FPS. I would hope that a $3000 worth of GPU setup would annihilate HD7970 Tri-Fire / GTX680 Tri-SLI but yet it doesn't.

Why did you insist on avoiding any and all issues when it comes to AMD? Avoiding the fact that they're counting extra frames, avoiding the fact that the frame distribution is awful and MS is quite common?

Why are you avoiding these subjects like the plague? Why have you never once said you experienced stutter on your 7970? Why do you take out full page ads for AMD products? Are you employed by AMD RS? Do you get kickbacks from AMD RS? Are you hoping through your work here something like the aforementioned situations could happen? Why is it you never play games, just post on forums and bitcoin, yet recommend solutions for gaming that stutters up and down the tests? What's really going on RS?

The Titan at 1Ghz is going to be barely 30% faster on average than an average overclocked HD7970 (not even discussing a 1300mhz Asus Matrix for example). Computerbase review shows this since their maxed out Titan card is on average just 35-38% faster than a stock HD7970GE. 7970s overclock to 1150-1200mhz easily which would make up 8-14% of that advantage since HD7970 scales almost linearly with overclocking.

And Titan won't, even though it scaled almost perfectly with it's units over the 680? 1200Mhz is going to take a pretty good sample, otherwise you're looking at one hot and loud "Fermi" card in your case.

You know, my 470s could hit 580 speeds, does that mean everything between my $40 470 and the $500 580 were overpriced and crappy? :hmm:

In AT's review the Titan boosted to nearly 1Ghz in almost all games and average performance over HD7970GE was just 34%.

titanboostclocks.jpg

Just like the 560 Ti was just 38~ percent slower than the 580, it's classic mid-range vs high end.. 100% markup vs 100% markup, what's the problem, you already paid a huge markup for your mid-range 7970...

You might want to rethink that if you expect AMD to send you stuff.

Overclock maxed out at just 1019mhz. All other websites reached very similar overclocking results on air which means it's end of the line for Titan on air at 1.2V and 106% power target.

You are paying $1000 for a card that's going to be just 30% faster on average when comparing Titan OC vs. HD7970 OC on air.

Ok :thumbsup:

Just like end of the line was 770Mhz for 470s and 1125 for the 7970...

Yep it's overpriced, but all cards are. Mid-range came with a 100% markup, you bought one... High end comes with a 100% markup and you cry? Come on...

Can't even get 40 fps in Crysis 3 without MSAA/SMAA!
GTX-TITAN-53.jpg


Even at HardwareCanucks where their card reached 1162mhz (!), the performance gain was minimal over the stock 878mhz Titan because of Titan's initial Boost in games to nearly 1Ghz:
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...orce-gtx-titan-6gb-performance-review-18.html

lol it's almost as fast as the 690 with a modest overclock on reference air, and you find reason to complain when it comes down to it in SP it's playable (Titan) vs unplayable (7970GHz). That's worth money buddy :awe:

HD7970GE also overclocks well and scales with overclocking:
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...70-3gb-matrix-platinum-edition-review-20.html

HD7970 1Ghz with a great cooler and 5 free games can be had in Canada for $380. In the US, you can find HD7970s for $360-430, easily. Only the biggest NV fans would defend a card that's going to end up less than 40% faster on average for > 2.5x the price when comparing stock vs. stock or Titan OC vs. HD7970 OC on air. :whiste:

Right I guess I'm "Defending", Titan is good price/perf, amazing perf/watt, here buy it here, link to this place, ignore real facts, stutter -- what's that - buy three...

You sound like a salesman, AMD can do no wrong, you ignore every problem they have and continue on like you have a deadline to get your marketing "Keywords" of the day quota in.

It's either blind bias caused by overspending for mid-range, or you're getting something... Luckily for you AMD doesn't require you to tell us anything :hmm:
 
Last edited:

SirPauly

Diamond Member
Apr 28, 2009
5,187
1
0
@RS

Using that same site if one looks at multi-monitor resolutions with x4 AA, it competes with the GTX 690 --- and for gamers that desire extremer modes of AA dominates the GTX 690 at 1600p and multi-monitor resolutions, even with DirectX 11 competes with the GTX 690 at 1600p and dominates with multi-monitor resolutions -- without the limitations of multi-GPU.
 

ICDP

Senior member
Nov 15, 2012
707
0
0
You are welcome to your opinions, I don't think I'm wrong and neither do thousand of other users....NV has a much better polished software team period...that doesn't mean they don't make mistakes, just fewer of them.

This is a better and more reasoned response than your horrible car analogy. AMD drivers do work well and on occasion do have problems, but they aren't the mess many claim they are. Unless we are talking about Crossfire IMHO.

Just out of curiosity, when is the last time you had an ATI/AMD card and was it single or multi-gpu config?
 
Last edited:

njdevilsfan87

Platinum Member
Apr 19, 2007
2,327
249
106

Last night in Crysis 3, I turned down shaders and shadows from very to high. I left everything else at very high. Now at 1440P with FXAA I'm getting 45-50fps (in the area that I'm in). Dropping those two settings resulted in nearly a 40% performance increase because I was around 35 before. And best of all, I can't really tell the difference in IQ because it still looks spectacular.

Crysis 3 isn't like the original Crysis in how demanding is. Our GTX 680s and 7970s are good enough to run "almost maxed out" at the highest single monitor resolutions. The best cards couldn't do anything close to that when Crysis was released. Crytek seems to have done a great job this time around regarding optimization.

... just a reminder I don't need any Titan for now. But I'm not OCD about having 60+ FPS all the time either. :p
 

Grooveriding

Diamond Member
Dec 25, 2008
9,107
1,260
126
We were reassessed for our property tax paid last year and there was an error made in our favour, we're getting reimbursed a respectable sum of money. My immediate though honestly was I could get a few of these with some of it and it wouldn't feel like I was out the money as it was unexpected money.

Managed to change my mind. These are going to get price cuts in my personal estimation, quickly enough that I'd feel like an idiot if I paid $1000 for them on day one.