Titan with full # of shader cores

[RussianSensation]

33% average across 40 games and over 20 reviews

Aren't you forgetting something? It seems someone picked the highest performance advantage Titan showed up in those games across the reviews. They didn't use 20 websites to come up with Titan's average advantage in a game like FC3 and then averages all 40 games. Instead, they cherry-picked the reviews with the highest delta in favor of the Titan. :whiste:

remove Sleeping Dogs and Sniper Elite which are notoriously bad on Nvidia hardware and it's 35%.

Remove games like the Secret World, BL2, which are much slower on AMD hardware....that's not a strong argument. If we are going to look at averages, include all games, or exclude games that highly favor. Personally you should keep all games since gamers don't discriminate games based on how the hardware runs it.

Titan's avg. performance advantage is already compiled here from tons of reviews - 33.5%.. Really MrK6's estimate of 30% is not too far off.

Titan is 45% faster than 7970GE in mutli-monitor setups.

That's nice but that's mostly academic in nature. HD7970GE falls apart in multi-monitor gaming and even 45% above that level is still way too slow to play on multiple monitors. You need at least 2 Titans for that in modern games. The 45% number itself is biased since as I said that chart cherry-picks the highest delta across all reviews.

Looking at 1 review for consistency, Titan is just 36% faster than HD7970GE in multi-monitors. But that doesn't actually tell us if it's playable. GTX690 is faster than the Titan and it's only getting 43.5 fps avg in older games on a triple monitor setup.

Looking at Titan in modern / really demanding games, it's faster than HD7970 Ghz at 2560x1600 but it barely matters. Try playing Witcher 2, FC3, Crysis 3, Metro 2033, Tomb Raider with SSAA on 3 monitors with 1 Titan. Not a chance.

When it actually comes to the most demanding games, the Titan is still too slow, which is why it's one of the most overpriced videocards made in the last 5 years for games unless you get 2-3 of them. Otherwise, the type of games that crush the 7970Ghz will generally still crush the Titan (see above). The Titan should have been $749 tops, especially considering GTX670 SLI level of performance was $800 more than 1 year ago. It should get worse next year when 20nm $500 GPUs hit. it's not out of the question that a $550 Maxwell/Volcanic Islands GPU will be faster than the Titan.

 

[Arzachel]

33% average across 40 games and over 20 reviews, remove Sleeping Dogs and Sniper Elite which are notoriously bad on Nvidia hardware and it's 35%. And that is only at 2560x1440.

I like how Sleeping dogs and Sniper Elite are notorious outliers but TSW, F1 2012 and Far Cry 2 are business as intended. Too sleepy to look up the benchmarks, but I'm betting that the later two are running at well over 60 fps on both GPUs and probably TSW does too with the silly Tess off. 28% faster actually starting to look optimistic now.

 

[notty22]

Titan now, as it stands is in a different class than 7970 (any edition, and gtx 680). Even 30%, almost 1/3 faster is a historical large segmentation.
Past hardware supports this. GTX 280/ 260 launch reviews. The gtx 280 was around 20% faster than the gtx 260.

And the price of the GTX 280 ($650, available starting tomorrow), that puts in the “high-high-end” category, is problematic too in the light of the very aggressive price point of the “little” GTX 260 – with 18% less performance on average than its big sister, it’s announced at a price that’s almost cut in half, at $400!

I'm aware ATI countered with it's 4870/4850 cards. Performance forced competition.
After that, Nvidia launched a gtx 285.

A gtx 260 (216)with more cores.

And a gtx 275, all at better prices than the prior top tier model. Enthusiasts always incur that 'halo' price tag. Especially at launches.

The rumor in OP, I expect less enabled Titan's but am less optimistic of a complete GK 110 any time soon.

 

[tviceman]

Aren't you forgetting something? It seems someone picked the highest performance advantage Titan showed up in those games across the reviews. They didn't use 20 websites to come up with Titan's average advantage in a game like FC3 and then averages all 40 games. Instead, they cherry-picked the reviews with the highest delta in favor of the Titan. :whiste:

I didn't realize, nor do I want to take the time to verify if this is true or not, but regardless it fits right in with the websites I use and trust - anandtech, hardocp, and techpowerup all showed titan >30% faster, with an increasingly larger lead as the resolution spans.

I'm not arguing that Titan is a good value, but it's the defacto fastest single GPU by a very large margin and comes with some really great compute performance if the buyer runs anything cuda. Calling someone an "idiot" for wanting to buy it or having already purchasing it is inexcusable. We're calling people idiots now for their video card choices? Ok, awesome.

 

[tviceman]

I like how Sleeping dogs and Sniper Elite are notorious outliers but TSW, F1 2012 and Far Cry 2 are business as intended. Too sleepy to look up the benchmarks, but I'm betting that the later two are running at well over 60 fps on both GPUs and probably TSW does too with the silly Tess off. 28% faster actually starting to look optimistic now.

Then just use Anand's review. The selection seems really balanced to me and Ryan Smith came to a 34% advantage.

 

[3DVagabond]

Weird if true, I would expect the other way around though: cut down Titan LEs for lower than $1k. Too much bad blood NV would generate the other way around... that'd be a lot of ticked off Titan owners.

I don't think they'd be PO'd at all. In fact, I think most of them would dump their old card at a loss and happily drop the money for the new fastest thing nVidia has.

 

[x3sphere]

I don't think they'd be PO'd at all. In fact, I think most of them would dump their old card at a loss and happily drop the money for the new fastest thing nVidia has.

Sounds right.

 

[f1sherman]

RS if you really went through 28 reviews double-checking those figures, adding and averaging 40 games...

it would be nice if you posted the results here

 

[SirPauly]

Looking at Titan in modern / really demanding games, it's faster than HD7970 Ghz at 2560x1600 but it barely matters. Try playing Witcher 2, FC3, Crysis 3, Metro 2033, Tomb Raider with SSAA on 3 monitors with 1 Titan. Not a chance.

Isn't there an ability to use x2 SSAA? And this would enhance at such a high resolution as well, one may imagine.

 

[SirPauly]

The differences in over-all may be different depending on review site:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...orce-gtx-titan-6gb-performance-review-19.html

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/887-27/recapitulatif-performances.html

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/grafikkarten/2013/test-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan/7/

But around 30 percent may be fair over-all and raises the bar for performance but one has to pay a steep premium, imho.

This is an interesting quote here with the GeForce 8800 Ultra review:

We do know NVIDIA has wanted to push up towards the $1000 graphics card segment for a while.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2222

 

[MrK6]

Good work gentlemen of the forum, you called out tviceman on his nonsense before I even got a chance. Keep it up :thumbsup:

When it actually comes to the most demanding games, the Titan is still too slow, which is why it's one of the most overpriced videocards made in the last 5 years for games unless you get 2-3 of them. Otherwise, the type of games that crush the 7970Ghz will generally still crush the Titan (see above). The Titan should have been $749 tops, especially considering GTX670 SLI level of performance was $800 more than 1 year ago. It should get worse next year when 20nm $500 GPUs hit. it's not out of the question that a $550 Maxwell/Volcanic Islands GPU will be faster than the Titan.

Exactly. The bolded part especially hammers home the point - Titan doesn't even differentiate itself as something better or the next echelon.

In the end, if you buy a ludicrously overpriced part and somehow expect to "get your money's worth," you're still an idiot. Goes for video cards or anything else.

 

[tviceman]

Good work gentlemen of the forum, you called out tviceman on his nonsense before I even got a chance. Keep it up :thumbsup:

Hahaha this made me immediately think of a religious zealot on a street corner preaching only to 1 person but thinking many others are listening and actually care. Comedy gold! :thumbsup:

 

[blackened23]

I'm not seeing anything inaccurate about what tviceman stated? I mean who here wouldn't use a Titan if cost were not an issue? It's not like tviceman stated the Titan to have great bang for the buck. We all obviously know that isn't the case. But it still is a nice card and the fastest single GPU. Indeed it is too expensive but rumors indicate the price will lower to 800$ in conjunction with the Titan LE release. Hopefully that is true.

 

[Zanovar]

Hahaha this made me immediately think of a religious zealot on a street corner preaching only to 1 person but thinking many others are listening and actually care. Comedy gold! :thumbsup:

Was funny

 

[ocre]

Good work gentlemen of the forum, you called out tviceman on his nonsense before I even got a chance. Keep it up :thumbsup:

Exactly. The bolded part especially hammers home the point - Titan doesn't even differentiate itself as something better or the next echelon.

In the end, if you buy a ludicrously overpriced part and somehow expect to "get your money's worth," you're still an idiot. Goes for video cards or anything else.

perhaps to budget minded people. There was a time when AMD was on top of the world and their CPUs were priced there too. The 4800+ (2400 mhz) was 1000$ but you could get their 4200+ (2200mhz) for half of that.
whats most interesting was it was only 200mhz slower! Barely anything. The 4800 was nowhere close to 30% faster, nothing like that at all. You could get 92% of the performance of the 4800 for half the pricem AND THIS WAS WITHOUT OVERCLOCKING!!! If you overclocked it there was nothing better about the 1000$ CPU. They both topped out around the same point. There was no difference at all.

Titan case is a million times better than the old AMD days. When AMD was on top, they had no problem sticking it to their fans. And their fans had no problem paying it. As a matter of fact, even though i would never pay 1000$ for 4800+ back then i still had envy for the ones that did. I still thought it was an awesome CPU and was glad that AMD was offering such a beast. And again, titan is nothing like that. Titan offers way more performance. currently nothing can touch titan that is priced at half its price. If you want to talk overclock, titan can overclock far past anything that can be bought for less. For now, titan is untouchable. Most of the time there elite items where not.

My point is as far back as i can remember the top of the brackets have been high and not of the best value. But they were the best. Titan is not a great performance vs dollar deal, its not for those on a budget or for those who buy budget hardware and try to get the most out of it. But since i have been around, titan isnt something shockingly abnormal. We have seen this many many times before. We see intel with extreme CPUs today and AMD with their extreme pricing in the past. But you better believe it, if AMD was on top today they would do the exact same thing. They have a history to prove it, one for all to see. The only reason they dont now is because they absolutely cant. They arent on top.

It is what it is. If you want decent hardware and on a budget then their is options for you. There is hardware that gives you less performance but a great price/performance ratio. If your really on a tight budget or love to save money, AMD has got you covered. Its nice to have options. But if you want the best of the best and have a lot of money, there is something for you too. Buy what makes you happy.

I mean, seriously i think there are people out there who have to keep saying things just so they can feel better about their value oriented decisions. Be secure with your choice and quit worrying about what other people might buy. They dont need you to save them money, its okay. Be happy with your hardware and dont worry about they guys who can afford extreme processors, titans, and Bentley's. No need to put them down or call them names (idiots) out of jealousy or envy. What they buy doesnt make your purchase in less special.

 

[Zanovar]

perhaps to budget minded people. There was a time when AMD was on top of the world and their CPUs were priced there too. The 4800+ (2400 mhz) was 1000$ but you could get their 4200+ (2200mhz) for half of that.
whats most interesting was it was only 200mhz slower! Barely anything. The 4800 was nowhere close to 30% faster, nothing like that at all. You could get 92% of the performance of the 4800 for half the pricem AND THIS WAS WITHOUT OVERCLOCKING!!! If you overclocked it there was nothing better about the 1000$ CPU. They both topped out around the same point. There was no difference at all.

Titan case is a million times better than the old AMD days. When AMD was on top, they had no problem sticking it to their fans. And their fans had no problem paying it. As a matter of fact, even though i would never pay 1000$ for 4800+ back then i still had envy for the ones that did. I still thought it was an awesome CPU and was glad that AMD was offering such a beast. And again, titan is nothing like that. Titan offers way more performance. currently nothing can touch titan that is priced at half its price. If you want to talk overclock, titan can overclock far past anything that can be bought for less. For now, titan is untouchable. Most of the time there elite items where not.

My point is as far back as i can remember the top of the brackets have been high and not of the best value. But they were the best. Titan is not a great performance vs dollar deal, its not for those on a budget or for those who buy budget hardware and try to get the most out of it. But since i have been around, titan isnt something shockingly abnormal. We have seen this many many times before. We see intel with extreme CPUs today and AMD with their extreme pricing in the past. But you better believe it, if AMD was on top today they would do the exact same thing. They have a history to prove it, one for all to see. The only reason they dont now is because they absolutely cant. They arent on top.

It is what it is. If you want decent hardware and on a budget then their is options for you. There is hardware that gives you less performance but a great price/performance ratio. If your really on a tight budget or love to save money, AMD has got you covered. Its nice to have options. But if you want the best of the best and have a lot of money, there is something for you too. Buy what makes you happy.

I mean, seriously i think there are people out there who have to keep saying things just so they can feel better about their value oriented decisions. Be secure with your choice and quit worrying about what other people might buy. They dont need you to save them money, its okay. Be happy with your hardware and dont worry about they guys who can afford extreme processors, titans, and Bentley's. No need to put them down or call them names (idiots) out of jealousy or envy. What they buy doesnt make your purchase in less special.

Nvm

 

[njdevilsfan87]

Why should current Titan owners be upset? The difference between a full GK110, and the current Titan is 2880 vs 2688 CUDA cores, and 240 vs 224 TMUs. That's it. So best case scenario, the Titan Ultra would be 7% faster. But since it doesn't have extra ROPs, or memory bandwidth, it'll probably be around ~5%. The gap between Titan and Titan LE will end up being more because the LE has got reduced specs in every possible way.

 

[crashtech]

It does seem that many gratuitous price/performance comparisons are proffered out of envy, or a desire to moralize.

 

[alcoholbob]

Why should current Titan owners be upset? The difference between a full GK110, and the current Titan is 2880 vs 2688 CUDA cores, and 240 vs 224 TMUs. That's it. So best case scenario, the Titan Ultra would be 7% faster. But since it doesn't have extra ROPs, or memory bandwidth, it'll probably be around ~5%. The gap between Titan and Titan LE will end up being more because the LE has got reduced specs in every possible way.

So basically...2 fps in Crysis 3 at 1080p?

 

[insertcarehere]

I don't understand why Nvidia will sell full shader GK110s as Titans (presumably high quality) for $1k when they can repackage them as tesla k20s and sell for far higher, isn't there enough demand for teslas/quadros for that to happen?

 

[Grooveriding]

I don't understand why Nvidia will sell full shader GK110s as Titans (presumably high quality) for $1k when they can repackage them as tesla k20s and sell for far higher, isn't there enough demand for teslas/quadros for that to happen?

This is what I think will happen. They're not selling any fully enabled GK110 right now, once/if they are able to, I think they go for quadro/tesla first. I expect we'll see a fully enabled GK110 Titan at some point, but no sooner than we see the refresh of GK104 in 780/770/760. After that point if there is going to be a Titan 'ultra' that will be when we'll see it.

I think this Titan LE will come sooner than that though, an $800 'mainstream' Titan... lol....

 

[5150Joker]

http://www.guru3d.com/news_story/nvidia_geforce_gtx_titan_ultra_and_gtx_titan_le.html

BOOM! The real, uncrippled Titan could be on the way for $1,000 and the existing one sell for $800, finally a slightly slower version for $600....according to this article that is.
So, if true, will you be selling your Titan or TitanS in a panic to make sure you have the real deal?

No because this is all rumored b.s. started by one group and then regurgitated by several others. As for the price argument, the only ones I consistently see bashing the Titan are people that can't afford to get one in the first place. It's a unique product with a decisive advantage over every other card on the market and is priced accordingly based on zero competition from AMD. Do I think its absurdly expensive? Hell yes but that's what happens when AMD can't deliver.

 

[HurleyBird]

$1000 for a harvested die is one of the reasons I didn't get a Titan in the first place. $1000 for a fully functional card could prove to be too tempting!

 

[RussianSensation]

I didn't realize, nor do I want to take the time to verify if this is true or not, but regardless it fits right in with the websites I use and trust - anandtech, hardocp, and techpowerup all showed titan >30% faster, with an increasingly larger lead as the resolution spans.

It's totally legit to rely on those websites. My question is did the person take 20-30 benchmarks scores iacross 20-30 websites for each game like FC3 across AT, HardOCP, TPU and averaged them out, put the avg. number for that game in that chart? It doesn't appear so.

The alternative approach is then to consider average performance of Titan across many review websites, which is what Voodoo Power chart does by BoFox. We get 33.5%, not 45%. Also, anecdotal evidence from Titan / GTX690 owners can easily confirm that neither of those setups is sufficient for triple monitor gaming in modern/demanding games like Tomb Raider, Crysis 3, Witcher 2, FC3, etc. I don't see how that would be different for games like Witcher 3, Rome 2, Metro LL, etc. Titan is good for 2560x1600 but above that, you'd want 2.

Then just use Anand's review. The selection seems really balanced to me and Ryan Smith came to a 34% advantage.

:thumbsup:

Even if we take 45% advantage in multi-monitor at face value, it's still insufficient for triple monitor gaming in modern games. The Titan on its own (without 2-3 in SLI) sits in no mans land above 2560x1600. And at 2560x1600, it's ~35% faster than 7970GE.

Calling someone an "idiot" for wanting to buy it or having already purchasing it is inexcusable. We're calling people idiots now for their video card choices? Ok, awesome.

I think the point he was making is if someone is willing to buy the latest and greatest, knowing it's not the full-fledged 2880 SP / 240 TMU part, that person shouldn't be upset if in 2-3 months a full 15 SMX cluster Titan Ultra comes out. If they could easily afford $1000 GPU and are willing to pay that for a mere 35% performance increase over a $410 7970GE, they should not blink at a $200 loss in value should Titan Ultra drop at $1K. The same person would just sell their Titans and buy Titan Ultras. We are talking top 1% of the GPU market buyers.

Since NV is having no trouble selling Titan at $1K, why can't they bump Titan Ultra to $1.2K and Titan LE at $699? If as you said the Titan is used not only for games, but semi-pro work, $1-1.2K for the intended customer base isn't a big deal. NV has no incentive to drop the price on the Titan since HD8970 is nowhere on the horizon. it appears there is a large market of users / students in engineering and other fields that want an NV card for compute work / CUDA. Titan delivers here which is why it has been selling fairly well. The Titan Ultra may end up above $1K, especially in retail as demand will be high.

I am not sure about the Titan Ultra dropping soon though. I would peg that towards Q4 2013 or Q1 2014. This way NV has all its bases covered should AMD sneak in some HD8970 card by December 2013. But AMD said there is no card that replaces HD7970GE in all of 2013 from the TPU interview earlier in the year. Since not even K20X is a 2880 SP part, it must be pretty difficult to mature the full fledged GK110 in large quantities. If the Titan Ultra is in small quantities, it's doubtful NV will move it at $1k and drop the price of the current Titan to $700-800.

 

[sontin]

Looking at Titan in modern / really demanding games, it's faster than HD7970 Ghz at 2560x1600 but it barely matters. Try playing Witcher 2, FC3, Crysis 3, Metro 2033, Tomb Raider with SSAA on 3 monitors with 1 Titan. Not a chance.

When it actually comes to the most demanding games, the Titan is still too slow, which is why it's one of the most overpriced videocards made in the last 5 years for games unless you get 2-3 of them. Otherwise, the type of games that crush the 7970Ghz will generally still crush the Titan (see above). The Titan should have been $749 tops, especially considering GTX670 SLI level of performance was $800 more than 1 year ago. It should get worse next year when 20nm $500 GPUs hit. it's not out of the question that a $550 Maxwell/Volcanic Islands GPU will be faster than the Titan.

And yet you praised AMD cards in the past. Ironic none of them can play these games better than Titan.

Titan is - and i know you like overclocking - 50% faster than a 7970GHz when people overclock both. That is a generation leap over AMD.