New Pascal Titan X!

[guskline]

Nice

I don't mess with water cooling my GPUs, mainly because I'm worried that I'm going to royally mess something up :biggrin:

This new Titan X (overclocked) is already outrunning my 144Hz 2560x1440 monitor in the titles that I play, which is a dream come true for me. I don't particularly like multi-GPU setups (especially since SLI doesn't work in many titles), so this is really nice.

Since I have a Dell U3415W (3440 x 1440 @ 60Hz), the GTX 1080 is great. I can see where the Titan X excels at 144Hz.

 

[bystander36]

But again, the cards aren't placed at MSRP of $600, they are all above that at the prices I previous stated. That is the MSRP for those cards. Retailers are pricing them even higher in some areas (esp small / 3rd party shops).

I'm not arguing that they aren't being sold at a higher price. Just the MSRP (Manufacturer's Suggested Retailer Price) is still $600. What you see at the retailers is not due to Nvidia's pricing, it's due to demand. In a few months they'll fall back to the MSRP. The same goes for AMD's cards.

 

[Termie]

I'm not arguing that they aren't being sold at a higher price. Just the MSRP (Manufacturer's Suggested Retailer Price) is still $600. What you see at the retailers is not due to Nvidia's pricing, it's due to demand. In a few months they'll fall back to the MSRP. The same goes for AMD's cards.

You just keeping getting this wrong. It's not $600. Nothing is $600. The MANUFACTURER, not Nvidia, sets MSRPs, and they have set MSRP for most cards over $650. These are often clearly stated on their websites, and sometimes on Newegg as well.

Seriously, you are actually completely wrong. Sorry.

 

[2is]

So much bickering over pricing smacks of envy!
You can either afford the current fastest\champion\best or not!, what is the point of bemoaning it?
Is it not the same with the pinnacle of any industry?

Pretty much wrong on all points here from my perspective.

First, nearly everyone I know who's into PC gaming can afford this card, but none of them are going to buy it at this price. Myself included. Am I envious? Not at all, I'm quite looking forward to seeing the performance results in general and OCing results in particular from those who have gotten theirs or waiting for it. I actually like knowing that if I want appreciably better performance then my current setup, I at least have an option even if I may not agree with the price.

Second, what's the point of bemoaning the "bemoaners"? You do realize there's always the person who thinks they're the "voice of reason" in every thread such as this where someone says what you just said. No one will read that, suddenly feel enlightened and stop complaining.

Finally, it doesn't happen in all industries. The issue many have here isn't simply the high asking price, but that this isn't the real "high end" card, but is being priced like a card that is a tier or two above it, in turn inflating the price of all the other cards below it and/or preventing us from potentially even seeing a higher end card.

The difference between this and other industries is the level of competition, which I hope will be more fierce soon.

 

[bystander36]

You just keeping getting this wrong. It's not $600. Nothing is $600. The MANUFACTURER, not Nvidia, sets MSRPs, and they have set MSRP for most cards over $650. These are often clearly stated on their websites, and sometimes on Newegg as well.

Seriously, you are actually completely wrong. Sorry.

Since when has Nvidia and AMD not set the MSRP on reference cards?

 

[Termie]

Since when has Nvidia and AMD not set the MSRP on reference cards?

Nvidia did. The reference card is $700.

 

[UaVaj]

35% faster is great.
12gb is whatever.
480gb/s is sufficient.
even $1200 is fine.

but beyond epic failed - with the sli bridge.

 

[bystander36]

Nvidia did. The reference card is $700.

That was a Founders Edition (what ever that's supposed to mean). I'm talking about the typical reference design.

 

[nitromullet]

That was a Founders Edition (what ever that's supposed to mean). I'm talking about the typical reference design.

NVIDIA set the MSRP for the Founders Edition (reference card) at $699, and set an MSRP range for AIB cards at $599 - $699. Note that the 'S' in MSRP is for "suggested", so that price range isn't written in stone.

 

[bystander36]

NVIDIA set the MSRP for the Founders Edition (reference card) at $699, and set an MSRP range for AIB cards at $599 - $699. Note that the 'S' in MSRP is for "suggested", so that price range isn't written in stone.

That's what I've been saying. They were just given a suggested price. And they all got the same suggested prices. Just because demand drove the prices up, didn't mean the MSRP went up.

 

[Bacon1]

That was a Founders Edition (what ever that's supposed to mean). I'm talking about the typical reference design.

And Nvidia never Manufactured a "typical reference design" card. So they can't set the MSRP for it.

The board partners did, and none of them released models at that price point, looks like $630 was the lowest one that was physically produced and sent to stores.

 

[Termie]

NVIDIA set the MSRP for the Founders Edition (reference card) at $699, and set an MSRP range for AIB cards at $599 - $699. Note that the 'S' in MSRP is for "suggested", so that price range isn't written in stone.

That's what I've been saying. They were just given a suggested price. And they all got the same suggested prices. Just because demand drove the prices up, didn't mean the MSRP went up.

I've tried to make this as clear as possible several times in this thread. Nvidia doesn't set MSRPs for manufacturers. Manufacturers do. And here are the MSRPs for EVGA:

There is no $600 card there, and there will be no $600 card, and it has nothing to do with "demand" driving prices up. It has to do with the reference card costing $700, and manufacturers having every incentive to sell cards for as close to reference pricing as possible.

 

[Termie]

And note in the screenshot above, the two $620 cards appear to be cancelled, as they've never been offered for sale.

 

[bystander36]

I've tried to make this as clear as possible several times in this thread. Nvidia doesn't set MSRPs for manufacturers. Manufacturers do. And here are the MSRPs for EVGA:

There is no $600 card there, and there will be no $600 card, and it has nothing to do with "demand" driving prices up. It has to do with the reference card costing $700, and manufacturers having every incentive to sell cards for as close to reference pricing as possible.

My mistake on the MSRP of at least EVGA. In the past, Nvidia has always set the MSRP of the reference design. This go around, they did something weird with the reference design, calling it a founder edition.

Even then, it's not like the MSRP on their base model was much more than Nvidia's recommendation.

 

[antihelten]

Don't know if it's been linked yet, but TPU has their review up:

27% faster than a 1080 (at 1440P)
205W (best efficiency of any Pascal card so far)
Slightly noisy (39 dBA), and hitting thermal limit (84 degrees)
limited overclocking (7.9%)

 

[Bacon1]

My mistake on the MSRP of at least EVGA. In the past, Nvidia has always set the MSRP of the reference design. This go around, they did something weird with the reference design, calling it a founder edition.

Even then, it's not like the MSRP on their base model was much more than Nvidia's recommendation.

And note in the screenshot above, the two $620 cards appear to be cancelled, as they've never been offered for sale.

MSRP going from 600 -> 650 is 8% increase in price, that doesn't get shown in reviews which listed it as MSRP of $600 in price/perf charts. Not to mention all the press and hype it gained.

 

[DooKey]

Don't know if it's been linked yet, but TPU has their review up:

27% faster than a 1080 (at 1440P)
205W (best efficiency of any Pascal card so far)
Slightly noisy (39 dBA), and hitting thermal limit (84 degrees)
limited overclocking (7.9%)

The rest of the story is they left the fan at stock profile. The X overclocks much more than 8% with an adjusted fan profile.

Here's more

"As additional datapoints I've set the power limit to maximum, temperature target to maximum and fan speed to 100%. Even at stock clocks this yields 7% extra performance. With the overclock active, the OC gains 11% from that, which brings the total performance gained after overclocking to 19.3% !"

 

[antihelten]

The rest of the story is they left the fan at stock profile. The X overclocks much more than 8% with an adjusted fan profile.

Here's more

"As additional datapoints I've set the power limit to maximum, temperature target to maximum and fan speed to 100%. Even at stock clocks this yields 7% extra performance. With the overclock active, the OC gains 11% from that, which brings the total performance gained after overclocking to 19.3% !"

I don't think there will be a lot of people out there who would be willing to run the fan at 100%, especially when it's already quite loud at stock.

It's a shame that we won't get any models with better coolers, but hopefully we will see a 1080 Ti in the not too distant future that will fix that issue.

 

[Elfear]

According to TPU almost twice as fast as my 980Ti.

 

[ZGR]

Even if the fan has to be at 100%, we now know that GP102 can OC very well. I hope the GTX 1080 ti with an open air cooler is on the horizon.

 

[Qwertilot]

I don't think there will be a lot of people out there who would be willing to run the fan at 100%, especially when it's already quite loud at stock.

It's a shame that we won't get any models with better coolers, but hopefully we will see a 1080 Ti in the not too distant future that will fix that issue.

Have a suspicion that most of the people who are going this for gaming are going to put them underwater one way or another.

Its hardly like they're cost constrained!

Not sure how long it'll be before the 1080ti, as they do need something for next Spring. If they do rush it out in relatively short order, I suppose Volta really will be 2017 sometime.

 

[x3sphere]

Mine hits 2050 MHz when fan is cranked to 100%. Going to just leave it at stock for now until I get this on water. Very happy with the OC performance though, did not expect it to clock this high.

 

[tviceman]

Don't know if it's been linked yet, but TPU has their review up:

27% faster than a 1080 (at 1440P)
205W (best efficiency of any Pascal card so far)
Slightly noisy (39 dBA), and hitting thermal limit (84 degrees)
limited overclocking (7.9%)

100% fan speed = 19% real world overclock gain. The higher ratio of bandwidth to shader power is allowing GP102 to gain better in OC vs. GP104. Of course it screams for a better cooler, but the potential is there.

 

[moonbogg]

According to TPU almost twice as fast as my 980Ti.

I know! Its pretty awesome. Something like this would be a great way to ditch 980ti SLI for a single card, under water and OC'd of course. Not at this price though. I bought two high end cards for a little more than this one Titan cost, so I won't spend double the price for a card. I expect a 1080ti to drop at some point.
If the performance is right and if I am wanting a better experience for BF1 then maybe I'll jump on a 1080ti if the price is right. I would consider an AMD option but I suspect that just isn't going to be a reality at these performance levels. If 1080ti is over $650-700 then I'm out. I'll lower settings instead and be forced into the lower mid range Volta options. I just won't go past $650-$700 for a GPU. Not happening. And I won't spend the money I would normally use for SLI and buy a single card with it. Not happening either.

 

[IEC]

1080Ti is looking like the first semi-affordable 4K single GPU solution. Titan X (Pascal) is more than I'm willing to pay.