[Videocardz]First GTX Titan X 3DMark benchmarks!

[Cloudfire777]

40% more in 3DMark Extreme than GTX 980!!
Also, looking like it will cost $999. This is my next card most likely

The memory clock is pretty much what you’ve expected, 1753 MHz (7 GHz effective). TITAN X has 384-bit interface, so the maximum theoretical bandwidth is 336 GB/s (I think theoretical is the key word when it comes to describing NVIDIA cards these days). The new TITAN has 12GB GDDR5 frame buffer, twice as much as TITAN and TITAN BLACK, three times more than GeForce GTX 980.

We’ve been told TITAN X will cost 999 USD, just as previous TITANs. We can’t confirm it yet, but we will keep you updated once we learn more.

Something I found on PCTuning

Source: http://videocardz.com/55013/nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-3dmark-performance

 

[therealnickdanger]

Nice numbers, but it doesn't beat this 780Ti... ;-)
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/8883740

moar benchmarks for comparison:
http://www.3dmark.com/hall-of-fame-2/3dmark+11+3dmark+score+extreme+preset/version+1.0.132/1+gpu

 

[Cloudfire777]

Yeah thats an ok comparison, insanely overclocked GTX 780 Ti`s vs GTX Titan X Stock

 

[FatherMurphy]

According to those specs, NV saw fit to reduce the TMUs in favor of doubling ROPs and increasing the Shader Cores. Perhaps GK110 had an excessive amount of TMUs, and the increase in ROPs will make GM200 more competitive at 4k resolution. Or maybe NV ran out of die space....

 

[el etro]

overclocking adds a ton of horsepower here.


And a interesting thing: while GM204 relies on high clocks to perform faster than previous graphic cards, GM200 seems to not rely to much on the high clocks. In the end this will be good for diehard overclockers.

 

[crisium]

According to those specs, NV saw fit to reduce the TMUs in favor of doubling ROPs and increasing the Shader Cores. Perhaps GK110 had an excessive amount of TMUs, and the increase in ROPs will make GM200 more competitive at 4k resolution. Or maybe NV ran out of die space....

What do you mean? It has 50% more ROPs, 50% more shaders, 50% more TMUs, and 50% more bus width than the 980. There is no reduction in ROPs. It's perfectly in line with Maxwell, comparisons to GK110 don't matter because Kepler vs Maxwell is Apples vs Oranges. A 780 has more TMUs than a 980 (and in fact, as many as the Titan X) so it really shouldn't surprise you to see this configuration ratio with Maxwell.

 

[FatherMurphy]

What do you mean? It has 50% more ROPs, 50% more shaders, 50% more TMUs, and 50% more bus width than the 980. There is no reduction in ROPs. It's perfectly in line with Maxwell, comparisons to GK110 don't matter because Kepler vs Maxwell is Apples vs Oranges. A 780 has more TMUs than a 980 (and in fact, as many as the Titan X) so it really shouldn't surprise you to see this configuration ratio with Maxwell.

I was comparing Big Kepler v. Big Maxwell, but you're right, these GM200 specs line up with the ratio shift to ROP/Shaders and less TMUSs as seen in GM204. Like I said, hopefully this means GM200 will not lose as much FPS at higher resolutions, as seen in GK110 v. Hawaii.

Given it has 50% more ROPs, shaders, TMUs, and Bus Width, I suppose it will also have 50% more L2 Cache.

I'm still curious about GM200's DP configuration.

 

[ShintaiDK]

So roughly 41% faster than a GTX980, stock to stock.

 

[tviceman]

40% faster than stock 980. I was expecting 45-50%. Slightly disappointing in my book unless its a cut down die.

 

[boxleitnerb]

Hopefully 30-35% OC vs default with BIOS mod (power target)

 

[happy medium]

If the Titan x is 40% faster than the gtx980, how much faster will the 390x have to to be than the 290x to catch the titan? 60%?

Could this be the cause of the delay of the 390x?

 

[dangerman1337]

40%+ faster than the GTX 980, not that bad. With drivers that'll improve and 999 USD for 12GB VRAM and maybe good DP performance wouldn't be that bad. If it is at that price point maybe they'll do a small price drop for the 980.

 

[crisium]

If the Titan x is 40% faster than the gtx980, how much faster will the 390x have to to be than the 290x to catch the titan? 60%?

Could this be the cause of the delay of the 390x?

Does it need to catch the Titan X? As long as it beats the 980 I expect it to be priced between $500-$700. I'd like AMD to get the performance crown for competitions sake, but it'd still be the second fastest GPU for hundreds less than the fastest.

 

[Cloudfire777]

If the Titan x is 40% faster than the gtx980, how much faster will the 390x have to to be than the 290x to catch the titan? 60%?

Could this be the cause of the delay of the 390x?

I think 390x will fall short against Titan X

 

[Enigmoid]

Its 41% faster in 3dmark but thats at lower clocks. With overclocking (and every indication is that this chip can overclock like a champ) to the same clocks as the 980 it approaches 50% faster.

 

[exar333]

Does it need to catch the Titan X? As long as it beats the 980 I expect it to be priced between $500-$700. I'd like AMD to get the performance crown for competitions sake, but it'd still be the second fastest GPU for hundreds less than the fastest.

This.

If it can hit 85-90% of the performance for roughly half the price, it will be 390X-CF vs. Titan X at a similar price. Guessing the 390X will win that.

 

[railven]

I think 390x will fall short against Titan X

Oh definitely will. But my biggest concern is of course price. Even if the 390X is 80-85% of the Titan X, depending where AMD pegs the price will sort of dictate where a probable GTX 980 Ti (GM200 with a few disables SIMMs) would land.

If the price tag for Titan X is gonna be >$1000, I'll assume the cards between it and GTX 980 will be in the $700-800 range, which just absolutely sucks.

EDIT:

This.

If it can hit 85-90% of the performance for roughly half the price, it will be 390X-CF vs. Titan X at a similar price. Guessing the 390X will win that.

This is my guess. And frankly, at current prices, I'd look at SLI 980's before Titan X IF the price is >$1,000. Shoot I've just about accepted the raising ceilings and have already budgeted $800 for my new card which breaks my cheap ass heart

 

[exar333]

Its 41% faster in 3dmark but thats at lower clocks. With overclocking (and every indication is that this chip can overclock like a champ) to the same clocks as the 980 it approaches 50% faster.

Very true.

If ~1000mhz is the stock clock speed, you can expect some REALLY good OCs for these cards. Most Maxwell SKUs have been good for at least 1350mhz with minimal power increase. I could see some great Titan Xs hitting 1400-1550mhz if you are lucky.

 

[happy medium]

Does it need to catch the Titan X? As long as it beats the 980 I expect it to be priced between $500-$700. I'd like AMD to get the performance crown for competitions sake, but it'd still be the second fastest GPU for hundreds less than the fastest.

So the 390x will be competing against some cut down cheaper version of this card?
Mabe a gtx 980 ti or something like that?

 

[railven]

So the 390x will be competing against some cut down cheaper version of this card?
Mabe a gtx 980 ti or something like that?

That's how it's been for a while. AMD's top card would fight it out with NV's second top card which was usually based on a cut down top chip. [EDIT: And I personally believe R9 390X will compete again a probable GTX 980 Ti based on a cut down GM200]

Long as price reflects tier performance, what's the issue?

 

[exar333]

Oh definitely will. But my biggest concern is of course price. Even if the 390X is 80-85% of the Titan X, depending where AMD pegs the price will sort of dictate where a probable GTX 980 Ti (GM200 with a few disables SIMMs) would land.

If the price tag for Titan X is gonna be >$1000, I'll assume the cards between it and GTX 980 will be in the $700-800 range, which just absolutely sucks.

EDIT:



This is my guess. And frankly, at current prices, I'd look at SLI 980's before Titan X IF the price is >$1,000. Shoot I've just about accepted the raising ceilings and have already budgeted $800 for my new card which breaks my cheap ass heart

LOL, definitely.

It is a little crazy we are talking about the 390X being a 'budget' flagship part at $600-650.

I will admit that the Titan X would be tempting to me at $999. $1300+ though, is just a little too much for me personally for this card.

The Pascal Titan could be worth that, but knowing SLI is on it's last legs and no HBM or NVLink, this Titan X seems like it might have a relatively short life.

 

[Kenmitch]

Wonder why no ultra run?

 

[exar333]

So the 390x will be competing against some cut down cheaper version of this card?
Mabe a gtx 980 ti or something like that?

I think so.

There will not be incentive to release a '980Ti' until AMD releases the 390/390X in June/July. Again, NV has timed this release well to command a premium price for premium performance over the next 3-4 months. Assuming the 390/390X launches June/July, the 980Ti would likely launch somewhere between the 980-Titan X in performance shortly after.

Edit: NV is most likely keeping the 980Ti close to the vest until they know the performance of the 390/390X so they can tweak it's clocks/etc. accordingly to stay competitive.

 

[raghu78]

So roughly 41% faster than a GTX980, stock to stock.

If you look at 3D Mark Firestrike Extreme the perf lead is 36%. btw these are synthetic benchmarks. I expect avg game perf improvement over a wide range of games to be lesser. around 30 %.

If the leaked R9 390X benches are true then its going to take the GPU crown.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1539306/...-this-time-with-power-and-temperature-figures

 

[moonbogg]

Card looks awesome. Looking forward to the "GTX780" version of this. Nvidia was like, "You people want RAM? HERE! Have the whole 12gigs! Now leave us alone!"