• 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.

[Videocardz]First GTX Titan X 3DMark benchmarks!

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Get this thread back on topic now, or I'm getting the ban hammer out.

Want to discuss future AMD cards? There are two other threads on the first page for that. This thread is for discussing Titan X benchmarks.

-- stahlhart
 
AtenRa said:
Even according to the graph above

<$99 = 19%
$99 = 15%

Entry to $100 total = 34%

Add another 20% for $149 and Entry to $150 is more than 50% of the entire market share.
Click to expand...

True, but now you are also moving the goal posts a fair bit, from <$99 cards making up the vast majority to <$150 making up a small majority (54%).

But I'm being a bit unfair here, since your point still stands of course, i.e. that the price segment that Titan X belongs to makes up only a fraction of the total market.

With that being said though, I do believe that the original Titan sold surprisingly well, considering it's price. And given the Halo effect of such cards, chances are that this would have had a measurable knock on effect on the Nvidia brand as a whole.

Of course Titan X looks like it might have a much tougher fight in this regard, seeing as it apparently has no dedicated DP units (the rumored 50% increase in shaders and bus width, would probably eat up the 50% increase in transistor count, thus leaving no room for extra DP units). Also gaming customers, will probably be more wary of splurging for a Titan card this time around, when they know that a normal Geforce version is probably not too far off. And of course finally it looks like AMD might actually have a competitive offering this time around.
 
OMG

60a.jpg


http://www.techpowerup.com/210601/boxes-of-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-pile-up.html
 
Kippa said:
That looks more like a 3d render to me. If it is a render I don't think they have used enough samples for a clean image, if it is a photograph it looks like it has been taken with a cellphone, either way the image isn't clean and at a guess is more likely to be a 3d render.
Click to expand...

It's probably real. Real, empty boxes.
 
Really? You guys are trying to establish whether the boxes are empty or not because of the stacking risk assessment? 😉 Come on...
 
Keysplayr said:
Really? You guys are trying to establish whether the boxes are empty or not because of the stacking risk assessment? 😉 Come on...
Click to expand...

Well, this is what happens in lieu of real, confirmed benchmarks. LOL

Edit: Wasn't there whole threads regarding the famed 'wooden screws' incident? 😉
 
Head1985 said:
Yeah it is 36% they have it wrong
In both Firestrike and Firestrike extreme is TITANX 36% Faster than GTX980
But sill i am not impressed i am sure FIJI will beat it.
Click to expand...

it would still be super close though. a 980 is about 10-15% faster than a 290x. assuming fiji is 50% faster than a 290x right(rumor)? fiji and titan x would be neck and neck. but fiji would be 400$ cheaper. I kinda hate amd for delaying fiji till june now. such a bad move.:thumbsdown:
 
Keysplayr said:
Really? You guys are trying to establish whether the boxes are empty or not because of the stacking risk assessment? 😉 Come on...
Click to expand...

No, but it makes sense. There's nothing to gain by bringing full boxes and everything to lose (shipping damage, theft, etc.). Now if this were for a giveaway or a pile that they handed to reviewers, outside of normal review channels for some reason, then I might believe they contain actual product.
 
96Firebird said:
Pretty sure its not a rendering...
Click to expand...

"NVIDIA gives gamers everywhere the power to prove unequivocally that the 1969 moon landing was real. With such an incredible demonstration of that power, how do you top it? There was only one way that we could surpass ourselves. The result is the Titan X. The image above was in fact a rendering, but the only card powerful enough to render the Titan X is the Titan X, so we put a Titan X in your Titan X so you can Titan X Titan X.

P.S. Can Titan X render a Titan X so powerful that Titan X can't render it?"

- Direct quote from NVIDIA PR Team to me. Just now. I swear.
 
therealnickdanger said:
"NVIDIA gives gamers everywhere the power to prove unequivocally that the 1969 moon landing was real. With such an incredible demonstration of that power, how do you top it? There was only one way that we could surpass ourselves. The result is the Titan X. The image above was in fact a rendering, but the only card powerful enough to render the Titan X is the Titan X, so we put a Titan X in your Titan X so you can Titan X Titan X.

P.S. Can Titan X render a Titan X so powerful that Titan X can't render it?"

- Direct quote from NVIDIA PR Team to me. Just now. I swear.
Click to expand...

When did xzibit start working for their pr team. Sounds like a statement directly out of pimp my ride.
 
lol.

Bear this with me. 390X is set to be released the same day as Titan X, reviewers having the cards in their hands, and not being allowed to "leak" anything until nvidia released their cards.

March 17 comes. The internet is flooded with Titan X reviews. The internet is flooded with R9 390X reviews. R9 390 is 5-10% faster.


/wishful thinking
 
Last edited:
DownTheSky said:
/wishful thinking
Click to expand...

Yes, but FUN thinking. I would love to see the best of both worlds in a close fight for top dog, competing for price and features. It's been far too long since there has been anything like that.

The harsh reality is that even if Fiji beats Titan X by 5-10% across a variety of games for half the price, NVIDIA would probably not price Titan X any different in order to "maintain the brand". They would certainly be more aggressive with the 980Ti, though.
 
There will be no 980Ti. The Titan X will be about $1500, it'll spur sales of 980 for SLI even though nVidia sucks at multiGPU situations with respect to scaling (vs CF). The 390x will be comparable and cheaper to Titan X, but nvidiA will then produce a 6GB version at $750 to go vs 390x and await Pascal at 16-18nm process since no one will do 20nm GPU.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top