GeForce Titan coming end of February

[2is]

Am I the only one who thinks of Shawshank Redemption when I hear the word "obtuse"?

 

[ICDP]

And yet the perf/$ improvement over The GTX580 was much better with the GTX680 than it was with the 7970 over the 6970.

So, if you need someone to blame send a letter to AMD.

Stop with this BS please. AMD are not to blame for Nvidia pricing, Nvidia are the only company who control that. Even if the HD 7970 was overpriced it doesn't make it OK to defend that the rumoured price of Titan. It's hypocritical to attack AMD for pricing and make out like it's fine if Nvidia doing the same thing.

 

[sontin]

Stop with this BS please. AMD are not to blame for Nvidia pricing, Nvidia are the only company who control that. Even if the HD 7970 was overpriced it doesn't make it OK to defend that the rumoured price of Titan. It's hypocritical to attack AMD for pricing and make excused for Nvidia doing the same thing.

We should stop ignoring the past:

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_680/29.html

AMD is to blame for the mess. It's very simple: We have only two players. If one ripping off the customers then the market leader will join the fun.

 

[3DVagabond]

You pay for the bleeding edge best if there is nothing that is close to it. Highly OCing 7970s does not count, no matter how loud or often it is repeated.

Not everyone bitcoin mines, that is such a niche it makes my head hurt that you would even bring that up. If you do, that is a massive bonus that should be taken into consideration, absolutely.

Also, if there is a low supply of Titan, why would nV give it away if it is going to sell out?


I woud keep the pricing/marketing tactics to the experts instead of the E-experts. AMD finally decided they wanted to turn a profit and would keep a bleeding edge card over-priced if they had one.

And the last time they did (6990), it was $700+, and I saw one for $1000 that came with a sweet little toy gun, which added at least 4% FPS.

People seem to forget the gap between and 8800GT and a bleeding edge 8800GTX, which were the only game in town at the time.

These are companies with shareholders, catering to a very niche market, most of which do not post on forums. One of them is barely afloat, and quality PC games are under fire from many angles.

If AMD can come out with a factory card that is close and causes nV to drop the price of Titan, which we still don't really have real reviews on, then great! I will again thank them for showing why competition is awesome. I just hope they don't take a loss doing so, with the price/performance king that was 4870/4970 because that would be suicide.

Bottom line is it's fine to charge "whatever people are willing to spend" if it's a luxury item, like a video card. It's not like they've discovered the cure for cancer and are holding the world hostage over it. It's also just as fine for consumers to complain.

The twisted part is people being told that Titan's gonna cost $900 and you have posts like, "Put me down for 2!" Then they're going to run them on their $200 1080p Cheap as TN monitor. Makes me scratch my head.

When AMD released the 7970 they merely matched the current high watermark for pricing. The 3gig 580 was the same price, or more, than the 7970, they didn't blow straight through it. Today people who are fully justified with the price of Titan are still indignant about Tahiti's release prices. Those people are either vested with nVidia or are pure flaming flying fanbois.

I think what clued the manufacturers in that they could escalate pricing like this is people are willing to pay >2x as much for the dual chip cards. They aren't 2x as fast, don't cost 2x as much to bring to market, and you have to deal with SLI/Crossfire performance issues. A single chip that's priced basically in line with the perf/$ of the dual offerings, in this case the 690, is bound to sell. Most people who will pay $1000 for a 690 will pay $900 for a similar performing single GPU card. And those who won't, clearly will pay $800 later once supplies stabilize. This is what happens when you factor "dumb consumers" into the equation.

 

[blackened23]

We should stop ignoring the past:

AMD is to blame for the mess. It's very simple: We have only two players. If one ripping off the customers then the market leader will join the fun.

lol

 

[3DVagabond]

Ignoring MrK6's obvious rehearsed statement, which was my point, why do you suppose Titan will be bad at mining?, is it not the DP that makes AMD so good at it?. As for $/Perf, the fat lady hasn't sung yet...I think some people are jumping too far ahead of themselves for both positive and negative reasoning.....Interesting how we have an approaching new GPU release and the usually suspects are beside themselves with the negative commentary...Actually, it both very funny and frustrating....LMAO

Titan is not all things compute, like some believe. The K20 still gets slapped around pretty good by Tahiti in openCL, for example. It loses 15 of 17 benchmarks in CL Bench.

 

[RussianSensation]

We should stop ignoring the past:

No one is ignoring the past. Most of us labelled HD7970 overpriced for the first 2.5 months of its launch. No one has even suggested that price/performance GTX680 brought was inferior to 7970's. We pretty much agree that 680 brought superior price/performance initially. Many of us also felt that starting in July 2012, the 680 ventured into overpriced territory and never came back from it. The discussion is about 6970 --> 7970 and people complaining very vocally back then. Yet now most of the same people aren't complaining about 680 --> Titan but the price increase is $300-400 for a similar level of performance increase 7970 delivered for only $180. 1Ghz 7970s are going for $380-390. Titan is probably going to be 55% faster for a greater than 100% price increase. That's way worse than going from 6970 to 7970 was when you complained almost non-stop.

AMD is to blame for the mess.

So your logic is once AMD launched the fastest single GPU and raised the price level to ATI's/NV's historical level of $550ish, NV now can raise the price from that historical level to $800-900?

It's very simple: We have only two players. If one ripping off the customers then the market leader will join the fun.

HD7970 is still the fastest single GPU this generation in the hands of enthusiasts 13 months later. Are you going on record that the Titan will be the fastest single GPU from launch until March 2014? Even if Titan is the fastest single GPU 13 months later, it will effectively cost $800-900 while HD7970 gave the consumer that title at just $550. It's not even remotely comparable. Once again, you ripped HD7970's pricing apart and claimed they ripped off consumers and here you are justifying NV's price because AMD did it earlier. Should Maxwell GTX890 cost $1,250-1,500 then since it will beat the Titan by another 60-70%? What kind of logic is that?

 

[sontin]

And the difference between the GTX580 and the GTX560TI was exactly the same.
So your problem is what? That nVidia is outperforming AMD?

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Titan is not all things compute, like some believe. The K20 still gets slapped around pretty good by Tahiti in openCL, for example. It loses 15 of 17 benchmarks in CL Bench.

If only that was OpenCL vs CUDA.

 

[Grooveriding]

And yet the perf/$ improvement over The GTX580 was much better with the GTX680 than it was with the 7970 over the 6970.

So, if you need someone to blame send a letter to AMD.

Wrong. 7970 was 40% faster than 6970 with launch drivers. GTX680 was 30% faster than GTX580 with launch drivers. So much logic in blaming all AMD's negatives and all nvidia's negatives on AMD....

Groove I am sure you are not as obtuse as you seem to sound, although I must remind everyone we are talking about rumours here.

These are facts, not opinion. If you disagree, let me know:

1. Price points are made by the financial people, not marketing.

2. You can never say card "X" is exactly 50% faster than card ""y". (Too many variables, and those flat percentages people like to give out are pulled out of thin air. Different cards perform differently with different games.)


So the conclusion is obvious: Initial pricing is not done by percentages of performance. It is done by ROI, number of units, and the projected number of units sold at a theoretical price-point in a target timeframe. Marketing may add a bleeding-edge tax if they are the first one to the market with a new card.

The goal of a company that turns a profit isn't to to sell a card that needs to sell at $600 or more in order to profit from the years of development, for $500. That company would constantly have bankruptsy and buy-out rumours if that were the case.

If they put a card up for $999, and it doesn't sell fast enough, or competition releases a similarly performing product for $699, the price will drop to compensate.

If Titan is the only new-kid on the block until the refreshes later this year, they will sell out as fast as they are put up. Frankly I think demand may be high, and the supply may be low, so "selling out" may not even be that big of a feat.

Agreed on 1 and disagree on 2.

Nothing is 'coming out of thin air' This is what benchmarks do, compare different cards and show how they measure up against one another. If you think benchmarks are worthless then I assume you just open a newegg page, close your eyes and stick your finger at your monitor and purchase the card it lands on. We could clutter the thread with benchmarks and links that will show the GTX 680 was the least impressive nvidia flagshig in terms of new levels of performance delivered, but that will just waste forum space. I'd assume as an enthusiast you would just be aware of where cards have slotted in performance wise historically. The 50% reduction in performance delivered in a new nvidia flagship with the GTX 680 is a fact.

You may interpret thinking as a consumer when you are one as being obtuse and believe as a consumer one should think as the vendor trying to make as much money as possible. That's your call.

I've said it earlier in the thread that I think if the $900 price is accurate this will be a very limited card that will sell out. If it's as plentiful as GTX 680 is the price will not last. All this is away from the concern of buyers who (hopefully) are focussed on getting a good card to play games with, now being charged $900 for the sort of performance gain they've paid $500-$600 for prior. Whatever the reasons for the price, doesn't change the price (if true) As a buyer of cards I don't care about the reasons behind price, only that if I want one I'm going to have to pay 80% more than I traditionally have.

Again though, I agree that if this price is right there are going to be very few around and they will sell out. Is this going to be a limited run card that quickly goes EOL ? Maybe, otherwise it is probably going to see massive price drops in no short order.

 

[SolMiester]

Titan is not all things compute, like some believe. The K20 still gets slapped around pretty good by Tahiti in openCL, for example. It loses 15 of 17 benchmarks in CL Bench.

Hey, did you see they have Titan benchmarks?...appears Titans isnt all that with CL either?
Must be a few units doing the rounds?

 

[3DVagabond]

And yet the perf/$ improvement over The GTX580 was much better with the GTX680 than it was with the 7970 over the 6970.

So, if you need someone to blame send a letter to AMD.

Because the 580 was overpriced compared to the 6970. The 680 is badly overpriced compared to the 7970. It's only going to get worse by the looks of things.

 

[RussianSensation]

And the difference between the GTX580 and the GTX560TI was exactly the same.
So your problem is what? That nVidia is outperforming AMD?

Going from $249 GTX560Ti to $499 GTX580 is "exactly the same" as going from a $499 GTX680 to an $800-900 Titan? You seem to hanging on to mathematical percentages only, completely ignoring that we as consumers pay for products with real dollars, not percentages. If Intel raised the price of an i5 4570K from $225 to $499 and for the 6-core Haswell i7 4930 from $499 to $800-900, you'd be OK with that?

Other people in this thread seem to understand the distinction between higher prices a consumer pays and higher % numbers on a piece of paper.

As a buyer of cards I don't care about the reasons behind price, only that if I want one I'm going to have to pay 80% more than I traditionally have.

 

[3DVagabond]

If only that was OpenCL vs CUDA.

That would be apples to oranges.

 

[RussianSensation]

That would be apples to oranges.

Nearly 30% lower clocked K20 2,496 SP destroys a GTX690 3,072 in many real world computational tasks. The benchmarks are everywhere that GK104 was hopeless for compute, outside of very specialized single precision math tasks. More evidence that GK110 fixes at least some compute problems of the crippled GK104. This should give more incentive for people jumping from 480/580 who run Adobe Premier, Photoshop, etc.

ElcomSoft Office 2010 Password Cracker

ElcomSoft Wireless Security Auditor

 

[BallaTheFeared]

That would be apples to oranges.

Isn't that what you're already doing?

 

[RussianSensation]

Isn't that what you're already doing?

OpenCL - The open standard for parallel programming of heterogeneous systems. OpenCL™ is the first open, royalty-free standard for cross-platform, parallel programming of modern processors found in personal computers, servers and handheld/embedded devices. OpenCL (Open Computing Language) greatly improves speed and responsiveness for a wide spectrum of applications in numerous market categories from gaming and entertainment to scientific and medical software.

Blocking AMD out of proprietary CUDA doesn't allow us to make a comparison. Throw GK104 into an open standard compute language and its weaknesses are evident. You also look at Adobe and other programs where GK104 falls apart even to Fermi. Not long to wait as GK110 should improve on GK104 massively here (Hyper-Q, Dynamic Parallelism) and finally dethrone Fermi.

 

[3DVagabond]

Hey, did you see they have Titan benchmarks?...appears Titans isnt all that with CL either?
Must be a few units doing the rounds?

I saw that too, but it was only one bench and it looked dubious. So, I passed on posting it.

 

[sontin]

It's nVidia. They don't really support OpenCL.
The specs are more interesting: 14SMX and 875MHz (i guess base clock) with a driver older than 23.01.2013.

 

[3DVagabond]

It's nVidia. They don't really support OpenCL.
The specs are more interesting: 14SMX and 875MHz (i guess base clock) with a driver older than 23.01.2013.

It doesn't require support. Drivers are irrelevant with OpenCL.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

It doesn't require support. Drivers are irrelevant with OpenCL.

You would think but you'd be 100% wrong, which is why it's apples to oranges.

The idea that OpenCL (7970) vs CUDA (K20X) would be a more proper comparison is because that is what the market actually is.

People aren't buying Nvidia Pro cards for OpenCL programs >.<

 

[3DVagabond]

You would think but you'd be 100% wrong, which is why it's apples to oranges.

The idea that OpenCL (7970) vs CUDA (K20X) would be a more proper comparison is because that is what the market actually is.

People aren't buying Nvidia Pro cards for OpenCL programs >.<

Try going back to why I originally posted what I did. There was a comment about bitcoin mining and how, because GK110 was such a compute monster it should be faster than Tahiti in BTC. I was just showing that one type of compute performance, CUDA for example, doesn't guarantee superior performance across all languages, OpenCL, for example. So, you can't predict that Titan is going to be good at BTC.

What are you on about?

 

[BallaTheFeared]

What are you on about?

I thought we were discussing Bitmining? On Nvidia cards most miners use CUDA for Nvidia cards, unless I'm totally wrong... Which is possible.


Though even still, Nvidia has a Pro market to protect. It's very, very unlikely we'll see a fully enabled GeForce GK110. Whatever comes to us will be cut. The 7970 is a faster bitminer than AMD's pro cards, you will not see this happen with Nvidia hardware.

So the chances the Titan will be faster are pretty slim, the only real question is if it can be profitable enough to earn some cash back. If that's your thing, personally I spend too much time on my PC to waste hours for a dollar.

Actually I'm just going to bow out here, because I have no idea what's really going on with these numbers for Nvidia.

The Q6000 is slower than the 680, it has 515 GFLOPs of DP, while the 680 has just 129 GFLOPs DP... It even have less SP performance as well.

GTX 580 512 (Fermi) 1581 G&#64258;ops SP 166 G&#64258;ops DP

GTX 680 1536 (Kepler) 3090 G&#64258;ops SP 95 G&#64258;ops DP


Help me out here RS, nothing makes sense (in fact I'm getting conflicting numbers everywhere I go)... I'm going back into Skyrim

 

[-Slacker-]

Are we still going on about this crap?

The hd7970 was $550 at launch because the gtx 580 was still $500 at the time.

 

[f1sherman]

Are we still going on about this crap?

Well yeah...

The hd7970 was $550 at launch because the gtx 580 was still $500 at the time.

and you're not helping ^_^