And there is also quite a bit more memory to feed. That also attributes to the power usage a little.
The 980 is ~180w. Titan is ~250w. That's about 33% more power for the same performance bump, right? Am I missing something?
Who cares about Fiji FP64 compute ability ? without software, hardware is nothing. AMD tool chain is nonexistent...
I said it many times, Nvidia is primarily a software company
It's an enthusiast SKU, its going to suck down more juice. Depending on the clock, power/performance doesn't have to scale perfectly in line with the other SKUs. I don't think memory has much to do with the power especially when all 12gb is not even in use, its not even active.
250w is great for it's performance, I don't know what all the questioning is about. I think the cooler should have been a little better than a copy/paste from the previous Titan.
It's an enthusiast SKU, its going to suck down more juice. Depending on the clock, power/performance doesn't have to scale perfectly in line with the other SKUs. I don't think memory has much to do with the power especially when all 12gb is not even in use, its not even active.
250w is great for it's performance, I don't know what all the questioning is about. I think the cooler should have been a little better than a copy/paste from the previous Titan.
Not sure what Nvidia is thinking here. They were able to do a Kepler Titan because AMD was a year away from having anything competitive, and it had improved DP performance. This time around, AMD could very well have something faster out in a couple of months, and the DP performance is gimped just like the GM204. Makes no sense.
I don't think unallocated memory actually shuts down and uses no power when not in use. Memory this fast and of this type has to be ready to go at any moment so I'm thinking power is running through it all the time whether accessed or not.
Not sure what Nvidia is thinking here. They were able to do a Kepler Titan because AMD was a year away from having anything competitive, and it had improved DP performance. This time around, AMD could very well have something faster out in a couple of months, and the DP performance is gimped just like the GM204. Makes no sense.
I don't think unallocated memory actually shuts down and uses no power when not in use. Memory this fast and of this type has to be ready to go at any moment so I'm thinking power is running through it all the time whether accessed or not.
Yes thats generally the case, on idle it downclocks so the idle state power use is quite good but in load, it runs at max speed. It's probably another 10-15W on top for the 8GB extra?
Either way, Titan X continues Maxwell's great efficiency so it's a good achievement from NV on that front.
@iiiankiii
Second that. GM200 is a beast that needs a good cooler for it to be unleashed. Waterblocks for it will be in high demand that much is certain!
Even if it is, its still 250w TDP which is darn good for the performance it packs. If you slap on a cooler like on the Vapor-X 290s, that thing would OC like a boss.
Personally, $1000 is a little too much for my taste this time around. I want to dabble with Freesync too, so I'd like to stay on the AMD camp so I get a chance to try out a Freesync monitor.
What are the chances there will still be a 980ti falling somewhere between this and the 980?
What are the chances there will still be a 980ti falling somewhere between this and the 980?
The compute is gone.
It's thermally limited even at stock.
Overclocking is limited by the cooler, plus low thermal limits.
The stock cooler is approaching loud, near the 290x "quiet" mode when overclocked.
Power consumption is in the 290/x territory. (I don't care, but read a few threads where people harp about the 290/x consumption, where are they now?)
390x is perhaps 1-3 months out.
I don't see this being nearly as successful as the titan 1.
$1000 is just a bad joke. What's funny are these parallels between this and the 290x. It's totally unacceptable for 2015, much less a $1k card.
Compute is gone?
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9059/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review/15
I beg to differ. It's actually much improved over original Titan save Dual Precision.
Thermally limited? Explain. All GPUs these days are thermally limited.
Seems to overclock quite well and scales really well. YMMV as per usual.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9059/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review/17
The stock cooler approaching loud? Man, it's actually the same, or quieter at load than the original Titan. And far quieter than 290X.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9059/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review/16
Power consumption is in 290X territory. But look at the performance difference. It is actually less power hungry in Crysis 3 than 290X Uber. More power hungry in Furmark though.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9059/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review/16
People harp? Are you comparing a 250W Titan X and it's performance to a 290X? Which consumes the same or more power at a far lower performance? I'd say that same people that "harped" on 290X for it's power consumption are actually marvelling at TitanX performance using the same power as the 290X. Come on man, be rational. Every one of your points are wrong here.
1000 dollars is pricey. That's about the only thing you are right about.
As the AT review pointed out, there is only so big you can make the GPU core. With 50% more (everything) vs. The 980, something had to give. The alternative was keep the die-space for DP and not give much of an increase for DP. I'm not sure what was the right move, but with the 390 coming out, and the need to have something faster for gaming between now and Pascal, there probably wasn't much of a choice. It IS a big loss though. I think NV should have just released this as the 980Ti and kept the next Titan for Pascal...
1000 dollars is pricey. That's about the only thing you are right about.
Compute is gone?
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9059/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review/15
I beg to differ. It's actually much improved over original Titan save Dual Precision.
I'll spell it out for you. Stock boost clocks going down due to the strict limitations. The fan being unable to cool quietly with an overclock. Unless the 290x is considered a quiet card, I don't consider it to be myself.Thermally limited? Explain. All GPUs these days are thermally limited.
That's STOCK.http://www.anandtech.com/show/9059/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review/16While the max boost bins are both over 1.2GHz, the GTX Titan has to back off far more often to stay within its power and thermal limits.
With plenty of noise!Seems to overclock quite well and scales really well. YMMV as per usual.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9059/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review/17
The stock cooler approaching loud? Man, it's actually the same, or quieter at load than the original Titan. And far quieter than 290X.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9059/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review/16
www.computerbase.de/2015-03/nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-im-test/7/Under load, the GeForce GTX comes titanium X on a volume of 47.5 decibels. That is significantly louder than a GeForce GTX 980 and a little louder than the GeForce GTX 780 TI. Maximized settings the graphics card then reached 50.5 decibels. and is annoyingly loud.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_Titan_X/28.htmlDuring full-on gaming, the Titan X is very audible as its noise output roughly matches the original GTX Titan. Here again, it is too noisy, not following the trend. Sorry, this is not 2013 anymore, and NVIDIA's own fantastic efficiency improvements brought forth this age of super-quiet high-end gaming cards with such exemplary products as the ASUS GTX 980 STRIX and MSI GTX 980 Gaming; the Titan X is not one of them. To me, it looks as though the cooler is a bit too weak to handle the heat, so NVIDIA had to turn up the fans; and since the Titan X is an NVIDIA-exclusive product board partners can not modify, I doubt we'll see quiet custom variants of it.
I'm not concerned about 300w GPUs, however read a few threads and see how many of those people are complaining now? Let's see how consistent their concerns about "250w" gpus are.Power consumption is in 290X territory. But look at the performance difference. It is actually less power hungry in Crysis 3 than 290X Uber. More power hungry in Furmark though.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9059/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review/16
I'm comparing the noise, power consumption, thermal limitations etc. which were why so many people (even reviewers, at least for the noise part) complained about the 290x. I'm merely noting the ironic similarities, titan x is better than the 290x, but for $1k it should be a lot better and yet it's remarkably similar.People harp? Are you comparing a 250W Titan X and it's performance to a 290X?
Did I complain about the performance? Nope, just that it's barely able to not throttle to base clocks at stock, is loud when overclocked, and that nobody cares about 250w at least today. The card lost compute, is the most expensive GPU ever minus the failed titan-z.Which consumes the same or more power at a far lower performance? I'd say that same people that "harped" on 290X for it's power consumption are actually marvelling at TitanX performance using the same power as the 290X. Come on man, be rational. Every one of your points are wrong here.
Nope, you just didn't read carefully. Every point was true. You certainly didn't disprove any of them.1000 dollars is pricey. That's about the only thing you are right about.