• 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.

Titan X Launch

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
swilli89 said:
I see most are disappointed in the price and/or lack of FP64. I agree with these sentiments but for those that were expecting more performance. Its a very impressive engineering feat that they have improved with 3 generations on the same 28nm process node.

AMD's chip will probably be no faster. Again.. due to 28nm. Once 14nm ramps we'll get our nice 70% increase we want from a new flagship.
Click to expand...

There has only been two generations on 28nm for nVidia. The 700 series (minus the 750) are just rebrands, not new cards. 600-800 = Kepler and 900 = Maxwell.
 
I am really thinking the Titan X *IS* the 980Ti in all but name.

My guess is that Titan sales cut into their higher end (ie: Tesla) market too much because it did everything those customers needed for 1/3 the price. By nVidia dropping the FP64 support, they force those people into buying higher end cards.
 
I really hope these do not sell well. Not because I dislike Nvidia (I have no feeling for any company for anything) but because it hurts us as consumers
 
Yeah, saw the 'review' was up...
I am not sure why anyone would get this card at this stage, especially for that price.
There just isn't enough of an upgrade over the 980 to make it worthwhile for the $1000 asking price.

I guess it is now AMD's turn to show us what they can do...
 
This has to be the least surprising launch ever, the card is performing exactly as predicted. That's not a bad thing there was just no extra goodies or something unexpected, a pleasant surprise if you will. I'm impressed at how well the 290x is holding up at 4K, very unimpressed that this site is still using a reference card! :thumbsdown:
 
Attic said:
Saw Ryan's review up here at Anand, very 😱 and :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
Click to expand...

I'm late to the game, just saw the review and skimmed through the benches, power use, and overclocking parts so far.

I'm pretty impressed, looks good. I think it is a bit pricey, $799 would have been nicer, but $999 is on the low end of some rumors. It is priced right for the market it is appealing to. Two of these in SLI with a 4K monitor (put that 12GB to work) and g-sync would be pretty snazzy. Looking forward to AMD"s response.
 
SlowSpyder said:
I'm late to the game, just saw the review and skimmed through the benches, power use, and overclocking parts so far.

I'm pretty impressed, looks good. I think it is a bit pricey, $799 would have been nicer, but $999 is on the low end of some rumors. It is priced right for the market it is appealing to. Two of these in SLI with a 4K monitor (put that 12GB to work) and g-sync would be pretty snazzy. Looking forward to AMD"s response.
Click to expand...

Yep, my thoughts exactly. Great card for super high end, and SLI with these at 250 TDP + the external exhaust can get done without exotic cooling needs.

One thing I took away from Ryan's review was just how hard 4k is to push, even for the Titan X. My next big push will be for 4k, but i'd like to be able to hug 60fps a bit better with single card.
 
The performance increase plus the 12GB of ram and extra memory bandwidth maybe worth it for 4k and surround users. However, value is probably not a worry for most of those buyers so likely 1st day buy where value of not concern since performance is there.
I'm using 3x 980s for 1440p surround so waiting on SLI numbers. If 2x TiX = 3x 980s then will seriously consider buying two for extra memory benefit.
 
It is interesting to look back and see how wrong some of the rumors were...

Wrong price, wrong VRAM, and this was less than 2 months ago...

Wrong core clockspeed, posted less than a week ago...

ChipHell has really gone downhill in their leaks.

Edit - I'm not really sure what clockspeed that second source is using for any of the cards...
 
Last edited:
Id be interested in more overclocking numbers because it looks like it starts matching stock R295X/GTX980 SLi performance. It somewhat hugs the 60FPS wall.. maybe better cooling can get it there.

Even if the SLi/CF setups are faster with their own respective OCes, the single card will always be better in terms of compatibility and VRAM especially at 4K.

Bout time the absolute performance wall is breached, although this will be out of hands for many! Better to stay put and wait for the Geforce versions.
 
Nice card, completely out of the realm of most people though. Reading flagship releases these days reminds me of reading car and driver... wonderful products... not in my (or most peoples') reality though.

But seriously, if I thought there were new games that looked and performed just incredible at 4k or with a VR helmet... I might consider a thousand dollars worth of GPU's if they were required. In the meantime though, most games look exactly the same on high vs ultra and I'm just not seeing need for this kind of thing unless you have plenty of cash and this is play money.

I mean... I used to be SO into new video cards... and now I can finally afford higher end ones, I have the most fun with Cities: Skylines and Dota 2 🙁
 
I really enjoyed Ryans Anandtech review.

I liked the updated games list, it's good to get some modern and demanding games in the review.

I wonder why there are only minimums in 2 games out of the whole list.

I think that we should really have frametimes so we can accurately see where the single gpu is actually superior to the multi gpu solution, from averages the 295x2 shines out of that list (best price/performance by far). AT should really get an aftermarket 290x, although on the other hand it keeps shaming AMD into doing something about it. Even the reference 290x shows up quite well for a $300ish card.

The only GPU I'd buy over a <$300 290x is the 295x2. It does very well, at least by average FPS. The titan is horribly overpriced and gets beaten quite easily by the $600 (sales) 295x2. Sure you suffer from the multi-gpu side affects, but from my experience XDMA crossfire works pretty well.

I still can't get over the fact that they have simply renamed the GTX 580 successor to "titan x" and bumped the price up $450. We need some competition to get rid of this gouging. The funny thing is that maxwell has cut out the computing portions to be a lean gaming gpu and now they charge you $1k for that pleasure.

It looks like titan x is already at it's low thermal limits since it can't keep it's max boost clock in any games. I'm also surprised that the system power consumption is around the the 290x levels (not that I care as the performance is there but it will be interesting to see the flip flopping of that "hot and power hungry" 290x complaints). It overclocks decently but the cooler and low tdp limits are right there keeping it throttling back. It also gets quite loud, clearly that cooler is around the limit that it can handle quietly.

It'd be a fun card without voltage neutering though!

If only it wasn't such a rip off! I really like the card but despise the price gouging.
 
nurturedhate said:
I really hope these do not sell well. Not because I dislike Nvidia (I have no feeling for any company for anything) but because it hurts us as consumers
Click to expand...

I'm actually surprised that enough people have bought $1k titans that there's demand to keep the lineup going. I mean, I'm fairly well off and a heavy gamer and I still couldn't imagine spending that much for a gpu that will be replaced by something 50% cheaper and just as good maybe 6 months down the road.

Perhaps I'm just out of touch and the market will prove so.
 
96Firebird said:
It is interesting to look back and see how wrong some of the rumors were...

Wrong price, wrong VRAM, and this was less than 2 months ago...

Wrong core clockspeed, posted less than a week ago...

ChipHell has really gone downhill in their leaks.

Edit - I'm not really sure what clockspeed that second source is using for any of the cards...
Click to expand...

The clocks in the second leak could have been an average of the boost clocks across the testing suite or something like that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top