Titan X Launch

[Silverforce11]

Yeah I would think their is equal blame to go around (between Devs and AMD).

Certainly. It does not take a genius to note that games where AMD does poorly in CF of late has often been GameWorks titles. It could just be a coincidence and NV/GameWorks is blameless, it could just be slack developers not bothering to optimize for AMD GPUs during development (relying in many post-launch patches instead).

The angle at which recent [H] reviews approach seems to heap all the blame on AMD, even after AMD publicly said they cannot get CF to work for several GameWorks titles without developers releasing a patch for it. Once patches were out, CF works. I was very surprised FC4 finally has proper CF scaling (thanks to forum member Karlitos here) after the recent patch.

 

[boozzer]

brent: could you include both reference amd and AIBs in your reviews of both nv and amd gpus? I would like to see how reference models stack up and also how the best of the best from both sides stack up against each other.

ex: a review of 980 including reference 980 + G1(or whatever is one of the top 5 AIBs) vs 290x reference + tri x or lightning(or whatever is one of the top 5 AIBs)

it should not be that hard right brent? for a professional review site? that would make you 100% my go to review website I wouldn't need to use chrome to translate a french website.

I would absolutely love it if you do this with titan x + 390x reviews you can always ninja edit your graphs in the titan x review )))

I think for $1000 Titan X should have come with a premium cooler. Premium price, premium cooling solution. But you just know there will be better versions down the road which is why to me buying T-X is not very smart right now unless you are putting it under water and don't care about costs at all.

If you can use titan x for 1 year before 390x comes out, 300$ price prmium would actually be worth it. cream of the crop does cost a hefty premium. But with 390x coming in june, a mere 3 months, it is extremely stupid to be buying titan x imo.

 

[boozzer]

DP, I need to keep up with my own posts

 

[escrow4]

brent: could you include both reference amd and AIBs in your reviews of both nv and amd gpus? I would like to see how reference models stack up and also how the best of the best from both sides stack up against each other.

ex: a review of 980 including reference 980 + G1(or whatever is one of the top 5 AIBs) vs 290x reference + tri x or lightning(or whatever is one of the top 5 AIBs)

it should not be that hard right brent? for a professional review site? that would make you 100% my go to review website I wouldn't need to use chrome to translate a french website.

I would absolutely love it if you do this with titan x + 390x reviews you can always ninja edit your graphs in the titan x review )))


If you can use titan x for 1 year before 390x comes out, 300$ price prmium would actually be worth it. cream of the crop does cost a hefty premium. But with 390x coming in june, a mere 3 months, it is extremely stupid to be buying titan x imo.

GTA V is in April unless its delayed again, Witcher III is in May, buying something in June is too late. For me at least. That said, this will be closer to $1200 AUD here which isn't a problem, the rubbish blower is. For a $1K I expect top shelf everything, yet the cooler is barely average, this isn't even 512-bit and its only a reference design. Less texture units than the original Black too. I may actually wait for the 390X and consider AMD for once . . . . . .

 

[x3sphere]

I personally think AMD can do better with its drivers. It has in the past, when they did monthly driver updates, but then they stopped. Now with the yearly Omega release people are concerned they will slack off on driver updates, instead saving them for big updates, with less frequency. Overall, this doesn't track well with the release of new games. A new game will be released, and you may end up waiting months before AMD address optimizations or CF profile support in said game. This is a valid concern any gamer would have.

Yes developers have a lot of impact on a game's support and performance at launch, but so do AMD and NVIDIA for their own cards in said game. They have the ability to get in there, before games are launched, and make sure the developer has what they need to optimize for their cards. It goes both ways.

I am pro frequent driver updates to support new games.

Despite AMD's slower release schedule when it comes to drivers, it seems they've done a better job of keeping performance up for the 290 and 290X in newer titles.

I'm not the first person to point this out, but Kepler performance has really went down vs the 290 series in a lot of games. I was looking at the benchmarks over at TechPowerUp, and there are several games where a 290 non-x is ahead of the original Titan. Interesting to say the least...

 

[3DVagabond]

http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-titan-x

Nvidia just confirmed all GM20x GPUs are feature level 12_1.

Feature level 12_1 was invented by msft for nVidia.

apparently it will be this way for a couple weeks according to AT.....they all are reference so partners are basically just distribution....not sure how they will take it.

So they are going to get the initial rush at full retail. I can't imagine the AIB's are happy about that. Not that there's anything they can do about it.

 

[lopri]

At least they are not stingy with VRAM this time. Kudos to NV for equipping the card with 12GB.

 

[Grooveriding]

GTA V is in April unless its delayed again, Witcher III is in May, buying something in June is too late. For me at least. That said, this will be closer to $1200 AUD here which isn't a problem, the rubbish blower is. For a $1K I expect top shelf everything, yet the cooler is barely average, this isn't even 512-bit and its only a reference design. Less texture units than the original Black too. I may actually wait for the 390X and consider AMD for once . . . . . .

I feel the same. The cooler is not a big deal to me because I would take it off and put a waterblock on it before using the card, but it's not enough performance. Overclocked it looks like I could get 780ti SLI performance out of it, but I'd want at least 20% over that and I was hoping to go to a single card because SLI has been garbage for me lately. Another thing I don't like; is as I usually sell my old cards, I will take a bath on resale if I bought two of these and I doubt these will even have 50% of their MSRP by the time new 16nm cards release. My guess would be $2600 CDN today to buy them, before 13% sales tax, and I'd be lucky to see $700 when I sold them.

If AMD can outperform this card I'll go for a 390X. It's going to have to be better at stock because it's a certainty the 390X is going to use more power, but if it's faster, that's fine by me and nothing a waterblock can't tame.

I do want something for Witcher 3 though.. and I don't see AMD delivering before then. I have such a backlog of games I can just stall playing it though.

 

[lopri]

I thought the Witcher 3 had been out already. When is it due?

 

[3DVagabond]

They didn't show the result of running 8 x MSAA though, its a slideshow, irrelevant. Pushing vram for the sake of it is stupid, [H] has dropped in quality?

They even did this:

"Amazing performance and efficiency strikes again. These wattage numbers are full system wattages taken at the wall. Our average performance increase at 1440p and 4K was 33% over the GeForce GTX 980. Consider above that the power increase is only 21% at full-load to achieve this.

All of this is also contained in the same video card size package as the GeForce GTX 980, no size differences, no exotic cooling differences needed."

.. like duh, it would be less % when using TOTAL SYSTEM power. Even took a swipe at the upcoming 390X with "no exotic cooling"..

Their own readers on forums are taking note of how bias they have become of late, pushing more GameWorks into their tests and endlessly bashing/blaming AMD for lack of CF support in NV games! Yeah, nice one guys. Even Tomshardware is more respectable!

System draw went up 21%. How much would the card's power draw have to go up to increase the system draw by 21%?

66W that is all GPU. That's at least 33% if you assume that the 980 is ~200W. Really a shame that [H] is kissing nVidia's butt like they are in this review. They are even using fuzzy math to make it look better than it really is. SMH!

 

[lopri]

The performance jump from both the 980 and the 780 is very respectable. From the 980, the performance increase is as linear as one could hope for a high-end GPU, and from the 780 it is quite amazing that NV was able to squeeze out so much more performance on the same node.

It sucks for gamers that the GPU prices are at $1K, though, when all the other parts in the PC have become more accessible and better performing at the same time. I don't play games these days but I certainly can relate.

 

[3DVagabond]

The 290x in the graph TitanX comes closer in the noise test is 290x default mode, uber mode 290x is still noisier.

So it's quiet mode (there is no default mode) for the noise measurement, but uber for the performance measurements. Makes sense, not. Anyway, I'm sure nobody will raise a riot over the loud cooler, or throttling, or heat, or price, or lack of DP. It'll be fine @ $1000.

 

[3DVagabond]

The Titan X makes the GTX 980 look like a really good deal in comparison. Of course, maybe that's part of Nvidia's marketing strategy.

Despite the maturity of the 28nm process, I doubt the yields on this massive chip are 100%. I suspect Nvidia is stockpiling them in preparation for a more budget-minded GM200 release, once they've milked the $999 price point for all it's worth. Presumably AMD's release of the R9 390X will be the trigger for this. My prediction: the cut-down GM200 will be called the GTX 990 (all future dual-GPU Nvidia cards will be Titan-branded), it will have 2688 or 2816 SPs (two or three SMMs disabled) and 6GB of RAM (and no GTX 970-style segmentation antics, considering how badly that backfired last time). With half the VRAM and fewer shaders, Nvidia will be able to continue to justify the Titan at $999, while still capturing more price-sensitive buyers at lower price points. I wouldn't be surprised to see GTX 990 slot in at the 980's price point, and the 980 drop to $399. Of course, the better AMD's competing offering performs, the more Nvidia will feel compelled to cut prices, just as they cut the GTX 780 price by $150 after AMD released the R9 290X.

I expect a 980ti with 6gig @ $700.

 

[3DVagabond]

You feel that way because you can't afford one and are jealous of those who can? I don't get how it hurts anything. They can charge what they want, which is the way every industry is. There's an option at every budget level.

Why do you have to attack the poster? He said nothing that would show the emotion of jealousy. He gave his reasons.

 

[escrow4]

I thought the Witcher 3 had been out already. When is it due?

May 19th. I don't really have a backlog to play through. There is AC: Rogue but that is a re-skinned Black Flag so I'm not exactly rushing through it. AAA games are coming out (delays aside) but this X just seems so-so.

 

[boozzer]

GTA V is in April unless its delayed again, Witcher III is in May, buying something in June is too late. For me at least. That said, this will be closer to $1200 AUD here which isn't a problem, the rubbish blower is. For a $1K I expect top shelf everything, yet the cooler is barely average, this isn't even 512-bit and its only a reference design. Less texture units than the original Black too. I may actually wait for the 390X and consider AMD for once . . . . . .

what is you current gpu? if it is 780 or 290 or newer, there is really no hurry. or are you saying you are willing to spend 300 just to be able to play 2 games at a higher quality setting 1 month earlier? 2 in the case of gta v. you pretty much lose 30% of your gpu value in june if you buy a titan x. No matter how rich you are, that just screams waste of money.

But, if both you and groove believe witcher 3(a great, great game for sure) and console port, gta v is worth 300$, go for it, nothing can stop you. at least you are buying it because of games, not because of the differences in gpu. you guys are hardcore, ahahha

 

[3DVagabond]

I wonder if Nvidia knows something about AMD's upcoming card we don't. With the DP missing and $999 price it's starting to really make me wonder. As noted earlier they left it on the table for AMD.

nVidia is not ashamed to simply cut prices when competition forces them to.

I think they'll keep the Titan @ $999 though and just release a 6gig version to compete with the 390.

 

[jhu]

Any Blender benchmarks for this thing?

 

[BFG10K]

Impressive performance over my original Titan (up to twice as fast), but there's no need to rush to get one. This time I'll wait to see how AMD's next card is, and the almost certain 980 Ti which will follow.

I'm glad I skipped the GTX980.

 

[JoeRambo]

System draw went up 21%. How much would the card's power draw have to go up to increase the system draw by 21%?

66W that is all GPU. That's at least 33% if you assume that the 980 is ~200W. Really a shame that [H] is kissing nVidia's butt like they are in this review. They are even using fuzzy math to make it look better than it really is. SMH!

Extra frames take CPU time to be generated tho, we're not in DX12 reign yet, so it could be substantial. Titan (and GTX980) are damn efficient GPUs compared to Kepler and competition.

 

[3DVagabond]

Extra frames take CPU time to be generated tho, we're not in DX12 reign yet, so it could be substantial. Titan (and GTX980) are damn efficient GPUs compared to Kepler and competition.

Yes, it is more efficient than last gen cards. Heavily castrated compute though to do it. We'll see how Fiji does.

 

[Keysplayr]

Yes, it is more efficient than last gen cards. Heavily castrated compute though to do it. We'll see how Fiji does.

I thought Maxwell handled compute situations better than Kepler where DP isn't concerned? And we don't use much DP in gaming. Am I incorrect here?
Unless I'm reading this wrong..

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9059/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review/15

 

[xpea]

Yes, it is more efficient than last gen cards. Heavily castrated compute though to do it. We'll see how Fiji does.

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

 

[exar333]

Thanks for the link.

An interesting time warp back to the reference R290X launch. Worse mistake ever in a long time from AMD to ship such a great GPU with such a crap cooler, recycled from the 7970 where it was already bad, which was recycled from the 6970 where it was barely enough, recycled from the 5870 which it was made for (runs cool & quiet).

They copped so much flak from reviewers (especially AT!) and users from both sides (seriously anyone who defends that kind of noise for a gaming GPU is either deaf or nuts)...

This IMO, is why 390X is water cooled. AIO allows it to run cool, quiet, with plenty of TDP room for OC with vcore and it won't throttle. Because its the reference design, it will also be used as a benchmark for years to come, instead of what we get with some review sites still using reference R290X in their charts.

Reading hardware.fr Titan X review, they noted that it can do impressive OC to 1.4ghz boost, they said its not sustained as the temp/TDP target is reached and it throttles back. So anyone who wants to spend big bucks on Titan X, definitely put it on water, it'll make for a killer SLI/Quad SLI setup thats "future-proof".

A CLC doesn't mean it can OC well though, on its own. For example, the 295x2 didn't overclock well, but it did run cool and quiet. The cooling solution is important, but not the only factor in overclocking. Just saying...

Agree the Titan cooler is merely adequate, but I'm guessing a lot of these will go into 2-3 SLI systems under h2O. Not an excuse, just likely.

 

[exar333]

System draw went up 21%. How much would the card's power draw have to go up to increase the system draw by 21%?

66W that is all GPU. That's at least 33% if you assume that the 980 is ~200W. Really a shame that [H] is kissing nVidia's butt like they are in this review. They are even using fuzzy math to make it look better than it really is. SMH!

The 980 is ~180w. Titan is ~250w. That's about 33% more power for the same performance bump, right? Am I missing something?