• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

***Official Reviews Thread*** Nvidia Geforce GTX Titan - Launched Feb. 21, 2013

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Personally I think average improvement measurement using a limited number of games is a bunch of crap. It really doesn't make sense when you talking about a suite of totally different games. Each game and the improvement on that game is what matters. So called average improvement isn't a true picture of what the card performs like at all. Let all the numbers stand on their own and then the potential buyer will determine if the game/application has enough improvement to warrant the purchase.
 
EDIT:

After looking at the graphs, woof the price is really - really hard to accept.

To those buying this beast, kudos! 😀
 
DooKey said:
Personally I think average improvement measurement using a limited number of games is a bunch of crap. It really doesn't make sense when you talking about a suite of totally different games. Each game and the improvement on that game is what matters. So called average improvement isn't a true picture of what the card performs like at all. Let all the numbers stand on their own and then the potential buyer will determine if the game/application has enough improvement to warrant the purchase.
Click to expand...

This is certainly how I look at it.

If FC2 only shows a 12% increase (for example, I'm just making this up) but it's getting > 200fps, the benchmark is mostly useless, whereas a 40 or 50% increase in Metro or Crysis 3 can mean playable vs. unplayable.
 
DooKey said:
Personally I think average improvement measurement using a limited number of games is a bunch of crap. It really doesn't make sense when you talking about a suite of totally different games. Each game and the improvement on that game is what matters. So called average improvement isn't a true picture of what the card performs like at all. Let all the numbers stand on their own and then the potential buyer will determine if the game/application has enough improvement to warrant the purchase.
Click to expand...

I don't know about that, dude. I mean I use my rig to play all sorts of different games. If we're talking about old games, then I'd agree, they'd be useless and skew the results in a bad way as the hardware would either be smoking those games or I'd be finished playing them long ago.

If it's a suite of current games then it's perfect. It's a good indicator of what I could expect from the card as newer games come out. I guess if someone is buying a card just to play one game then focussing on just a single game would make sense, but I just assume most gamers play lots of games. Particularly ones spending this sort of money.

Looking at HWC most recent review these are the current games they bench;

Batman AC
Crysis 2
Battlefield 3
Deus Ex HR
Metro 2033
Dirt 3
Shogun 2
Skyrim

I've always found overall averages invaluable and generally play out well for what I can expect from a card overall in my usage of it. Particularly computerbase.de's overall charts, which break it down by overall performance at 1080P, 1200P, 1600P and also by different AA levels; 4x, 8x etc.
 
Brings to mind the 8800 Ultra. But less performance spread between it and the 8800gtx than with the Titan vs 680. Ultra I think was announced at $999 but quickly went down to around $800. If NV are making these in larger numbers than assumed, Titans price should go down similarly.
 
Keysplayr said:
If you know that much, then you also know the spread of the percentage spectrum doesnt max at 40% as you allude to. Is 40% The highest you've seen in previous graphs? I'm looking again right now.
Click to expand...

The graphs show a 40% increase over 7970 GE at 2560x1600 resolution. 1920x1200 is a far more popular resolution and the delta is reduced to 33%.

~180% price premium for 33% - 40% performance increase is a scam. Arguing over a few percentage points here and there is NOT going to change the overall perception of Titan being a rip off for the performance delivered.

When the HD 7970 was released it was IMHO overpriced by ~$50-$70 but at least it was ~27% faster than GTX 680 for a slightly higher price. So price/perf did at least remain similar compared to a 1.5GB GTX 580.

You were one of the ones who claimed the price of HD 7970 was a rip-off. Yet here you are attempting to deflect from the ridiculous price/perf of Titan by arguing over a few percent here and there on performance.

Let me reiterate the prices involved here.

HD 7970 ~$360
Geforce Titan ~$1000
 
Titan is terrible value for the money, why can't we just accept this and move on ? There will still be people who buy it, for whatever reason, and there will be plenty more who won't for their own reasons, most likely because of the price.
 
Annisman* said:
Titan is terrible value for the money, why can't we just accept this and move on ? There will still be people who buy it, for whatever reason, and there will be plenty more who won't for their own reasons, most likely because of the price.
Click to expand...

At what point whould we make a fuss? When top end GPUs are $1500? $2000? $3000?
 
Annisman* said:
Titan is terrible value for the money, why can't we just accept this and move on ? There will still be people who buy it, for whatever reason, and there will be plenty more who won't for their own reasons, most likely because of the price.
Click to expand...

Exactly, but it sure it fast and shiny and new.......my precious.
 
The card itself is awesome and so is its performance. That price though, ouch!

I'm more interested in seeing how AMD's latest drivers have improved performance for 7970 and 7970 Crossfire. Hoping the Titan reviews use the latest beta's.
 
Annisman* said:
Titan is terrible value for the money, why can't you just accept this and move on ? There will still be people who buy it, for whatever reason, and there will be plenty more who won't for their own reasons, most likely because of the price.
Click to expand...

FTFY

People have opinions, if you don't like them why don't you move on?

Random bench (dunno if fake):

500x1000px-LL-fa00791f_14340411152100titan1600.png


Feel free to pay 225% for that. 😛
 
Last edited:
So early indications show a 25% improvment over HD 7970 GE at 2560x1600.

If this is true then Titan is even more of a rip-off then anticipated.
 
The issue here is that 2x 7950 and maybe 7870's in SLI could clobber this Titan at a fraction of the price
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top