[Videocardz]First GTX Titan X 3DMark benchmarks!

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

tolis626

Senior member
Aug 25, 2013
399
0
76
Lemme throw some stuff out there.

First off, ok, Hawaii was hot and power hungry. I don't disagree. But it wasn't at the same degree as people make it out to be. You'd be amazed by the difference in power consumption between a reference Hawaii card and a water cooled one (even ghetto cooled, doesn't matter) or even the best air cooled cards. The situation wasn't nearly as dramatic in the real world. But, reviewers and early adopters got the turd that the reference cooler was, and that's what stuck in people's minds. Hawaii is a different card if cooled properly and that should be common knowledge. Many seem to forget, so I'm here to remind you guys.

Secondly, if the Titan X retails for the rumoured 1350$, it will redefine stupid. I mean, come on, for that price you can buy a full rig. Unless you can somehow justify it or if you have THAT much disposable income (If money grows on trees where you're from, I'll come for a visit), it's a bad buy. End of story. I don't think anyone can argue with that. What I'd expect from a 1000+$ card is top notch performance at the very least.

Third, I'd also expect top notch performance from a card that's late to the market, hyped to hell, cooled by water, that has a massive die and shader count and the biggest jump in memory performance in recent years. If AMD fails to deliver something that at least matches the Titan X stock-vs-stock, I'll be pretty pissed. And seeing how well Maxwell overclocks in general, I'd love it if the 390x overclocks well too, but I doubt it. And for the love of god, I hope AMD stops playing the price to performance game (While still pricing reasonably) and try to go for an absolute, undisputable performance lead. Being the cheaper choice has hurt their brand name so much that it will take some pretty big wins to reverse the damage.

With all that said, I expect we'll see a situation like when the 290x/290 launched, where the 290 rivaled the 780 and the 290x rivaled the Titan. Only now, NVidia doesn't have a 780ti up their sleeve. Or at least none that we know of. Last time they were able to pull a middle finger move to AMD. I hope AMD have learned their lesson. And they should market the 390x the right way, like NVidia is sure going to do for the Titan X. And having a hybrid water cooler and a reference design that looks cool and premium is a step in the right direction. Even if it's not needed, such a solution is vastly superior to what came before it and will definitely appeal to the uninformed or half-informed customer. You and me may know the how's and why's of the water cooling component of the card, but most will just see a premium product, not a plastic piece of noisy crap.

And before I venture further off topic, damn is the Titan X a beast. I may not be an NVidia guy, but they do deliver, I have to give them that. Also, since benchmarks and performance and whatnot have been discussed to death (And a little beyond it), I'd like to take a moment and appreciate how awesome the cooler on this thing looks. NVidia's previous reference cooler looked really nice, being metal and all, but this thing... I'd want this in my rig. I'd want to show it, to see it. Damn did they do a good job.
 

antihelten

Golden Member
Feb 2, 2012
1,764
274
126
Who said those slides was of R9 390X other than wccf speculating it was that? It could have been Titan X as well, and they were not far off

The picture thats covering the name of the GPU in those slides is actually a picture of the island called Treasure Island, which is located in the Fiji island group, so it doesn't really take a genius to figure out which GPU is hiding underneath.
 
Last edited:

ocre

Golden Member
Dec 26, 2008
1,594
7
81
This is thread is a out the Titan X.

The performance should be round about 35% faster than the 980 in games. That is taking account higher resolutions. At 1080 it maybe slightly less, higher resolutions slightly more.

The reason is simple, the Titan X is clocked lower and performance is exactly where it should be considering. I also expect the Titan x will be completely vindicated when it comes to overclocking. This chip should be an overclocked dream come true. I truly expect that we will be seeing clocks as high as 1400mhz and beyond. That's a massive increase percentage wise, especially in comparison to the gm204s out. They all have similar overclocking ranges but the gm204 chips start out with higher base clocks.

So max overclock to max overclock, the Titan X should end up faster than 35% stock speed advantage. Especially if we get vendor OC options.

As for the 390x, I see this new stance.....

So now Fiji doesn't even need the closed loop cooler, it is there just for the heck of it? How and where does this come from? The specs of Fiji compared to the 290x, I would say best case scenario its 40% faster than the 290x.

The Titan x has 50% more physical cores, ROPs. Etc over the 980 butreal world performance is 34-40%. But yet we are now sure that Fiji somehow is able to have 100% perfect scaling and then some. People are saying they expect it to easily beat the titan X? What? This is one way to set up a possibly great GPU to disappoint? Great expectations are a great way to condemn this card before it launches. With its supposed specs, people are spreading that Fiji will be straight from the heavens. It would have to be insanely faster than the 290x, like 70-80%. That's crazy to expect, on the same node?

If you look at the time frame, in months, it looks more like Fiji has had a respin. Its not so hard to think that these large chips are very hard to produce. I will say that this is my belief. I think there has been problems.
Fiji is manufactured at glofo, is it not? How does glofo compare to tsmc when it comes to their process? Not all fabs are equal.

Regardless, the time frame is pointing to manufacturing issues to me. It is just enough time for a respin. This is just my wild speculations, but I don't buy AMD sitting on gold just for the heck of it. There is something more behind it, and that I feel sure of.

So, there just hasn't been any reliable leaks. We don't get accurate leaks 6-9months before a card launches. There hasn't been Fiji gpus in the wild yet. When they are in the wild, we will see floods of leaks. Kind of like we see the Titan x now
 

tviceman

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2008
6,734
514
126
www.facebook.com
What percentage of OC do 980 typically reach? Hawaii can go from 1ghz to 1.2ghz so thats a straight 20% OC with added vcore. Power consumption goes crazy so 1.15ghz is more the norm, or 15%. But my point re the performance gap isn't so much to debate with you R290X vs 980. It's to showcase the overall performance we extrapolate from to arrive at Titan X vs 390X.

Ah the nuances. You are ALWAYS fudging numbers in favor of AMD and against Nvidia. 1080p comparisons for worst possible gains when comparing Nvidia cards to one another, citing rare absolute best-possible AMD overclocks (average of 5 aftermarket 290x cards is below 1150mhz, none reach 1200mhz and also [H] has never had a 290x that reached 1200mhz). You literally do it every single day and smudge just small enough that it's rarely called out, and when it is you claim innocence or fend ignorance or make up excuses out of thin air (like Nvidia slotted the gtx 680 as a 1080p card when in fact THEY DID NOT).

Please refrain from personal attacks and call outs.
-moderator subyman
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Feb 19, 2009
10,457
10
76
Ah the nuances. You are ALWAYS fudging numbers in favor of AMD and against Nvidia. 1080p comparisons for worst possible gains when comparing Nvidia cards to one another, citing rare absolute best-possible AMD overclocks (average of 5 aftermarket 290x cards is below 1150mhz, none reach 1200mhz and also [H] has never had a 290x that reached 1200mhz). You literally do it every single day and smudge just small enough that it's rarely called out, and when it is you claim innocence or fend ignorance or make up excuses out of thin air (like Nvidia slotted the gtx 680 as a 1080p card when in fact THEY DID NOT). It gets old so quick. You're either a blatant pathological liar or a huge AMD troll masquerading as a guy trying to walk a tight rope. Probably both, but it just has to be pointed out.

I mentioned that these days the R290X is only ~10% behind the 980. TPU & Computerbase.de show it in a wide range of games. You bring up OC as a factor. So I ask for % OC. HWBot has thousands of samples submitted and is far more reliable than a few reviews you cherry pick. Yet you accuse me of cherry picking?

I posted Titan X seems to be ~35% faster than 980. You claimed I make things up to make NV look bad, that its 41%. I posted the 3d Mark Graphics Score to show its actually 35%..

Since you don't want to discuss the merits of the topic at hand and detour with personal attacks (& member call-out), I won't bother to respond to your posts in future. Learn some manners!
 
Last edited:
Feb 19, 2009
10,457
10
76
The performance should be round about 35% faster than the 980 in games. That is taking account higher resolutions. At 1080 it maybe slightly less, higher resolutions slightly more.

The reason is simple, the Titan X is clocked lower and performance is exactly where it should be considering. I also expect the Titan x will be completely vindicated when it comes to overclocking. This chip should be an overclocked dream come true. I truly expect that we will be seeing clocks as high as 1400mhz and beyond.

I agree with you, NV is targeting a low TDP and not pushing the clocks. 35% is fine, a good gap to command a premium. It works, they done it already with the 680 -> Titan move.

As to OC, its going to depends on the reference blower. Once you crank some volts into a big die, power use sky rockets (as we've seen with major 780/ti OCs, 400W+), at which point I don't think the reference blower is capable. Unlike the 980 or 780/ti with so many excellent custom coolers, Titan X is NV designed reference only. That has to be a factor.
 

Elfear

Diamond Member
May 30, 2004
7,115
690
126
Ah the nuances. You are ALWAYS fudging numbers in favor of AMD and against Nvidia. 1080p comparisons for worst possible gains when comparing Nvidia cards to one another, citing rare absolute best-possible AMD overclocks (average of 5 aftermarket 290x cards is below 1150mhz, none reach 1200mhz and also [H] has never had a 290x that reached 1200mhz). You literally do it every single day and smudge just small enough that it's rarely called out, and when it is you claim innocence or fend ignorance or make up excuses out of thin air (like Nvidia slotted the gtx 680 as a 1080p card when in fact THEY DID NOT). It gets old so quick. You're either a blatant pathological liar or a huge AMD troll masquerading as a guy trying to walk a tight rope. Probably both, but it just has to be pointed out.

The point Silverforce was trying to make is that Maxwell doesn't have a huge overclocking advantage over Hawaii even if 1200Mhz isn't the norm. A GTX 980 boosts to 1216-1393Mhz out of the box depending on the card. According to ~9,500 overclocking results submitted to HWBot, the average OC for a 980 is 1456Mhz. Assuming worst case scenario boost clocks of 1216Mhz, that is a ~20% increase. With a card like the Classified, even boosting into the 1550Mhz range is only an 11% increase from the 1393Mhz boost clocks.

The 290X averages 1143Mhz on average based on ~7,500 results. At stock clocks of 1000Mhz, that's a 14.3% increase. Not really a huge difference in overclocking potential between Maxwell and Hawaii although to be fair it probably requires a lot more power to run the 290X@1143Mhz than the 980@1456Mhz.
 

Head1985

Golden Member
Jul 8, 2014
1,866
699
136
Versus 390X for context. Titan X uses 37W less than 390X. Not as big a power gap as from the R290X vs 980.







The same source has said many months ago, 390X is faster than "full-fat" GM200. Looks like they may be right. The interesting thing is the OC potential. Exciting times ahead (even if its 28nm!!).
From that old leak FIJI ES is like 5% faster than TITANX.It will be indeed very interesting fight.
AMD/ATI is know for bad early drivers so we can expect more performance gain before launch.I still exept FIJI beating Titan by 10%.
 

digitaldurandal

Golden Member
Dec 3, 2009
1,828
0
76
No doubt they can, but Nvidia outspends AMD on R&D and it shows with nothing new in the last 2 years from AMD while Maxwell eats their lunch.

290x launched in October of 2013.
780 launched in May of 2013.

The time from product launch to product launch for both companies is not so different as you claim. If AMD launches in June they are 2 months behind in comparison to NV refresh.

AMD R&D is so poor that the 290 competes with 970 and the 290x competes with the 980...
 
Feb 19, 2009
10,457
10
76
290x launched in October of 2013.
780 launched in May of 2013.

The time from product launch to product launch for both companies is not so different as you claim. If AMD launches in June they are 2 months behind in comparison to NV refresh.

AMD R&D is so poor that the 290 competes with 970 and the 290x competes with the 980...

I think those who draw the obvious (but wrong) conclusion regarding the lateness of AMD with a new gen compared to Maxwell as a result of their lower R&D investment need to remember when Fermi was very very late. Was that due to a lack of R&D funds also or do negative connotations don't apply to NV? .

Either way, its coming soon. Hopefully in time for mass availability of 1440/4K screens with Freesync.
 

Kippa

Senior member
Dec 12, 2011
392
1
81
With some benchmarks out, could the Titan X realistically play a game like Battlefield 4 on a 4K monitor well with gfx settings on high and AA off?
 

digitaldurandal

Golden Member
Dec 3, 2009
1,828
0
76
I think those who draw the obvious (but wrong) conclusion regarding the lateness of AMD with a new gen compared to Maxwell as a result of their lower R&D investment need to remember when Fermi was very very late. Was that due to a lack of R&D funds also or do negative connotations don't apply to NV? .

Either way, its coming soon. Hopefully in time for mass availability of 1440/4K screens with Freesync.

It's just easier to bash a company without any fact checking, I found the launch date of both products in seconds via Google.

Moving off of that subject and back on topic - I hope that Titan X does well but i'm not convinced they will sell as many not after the Titan fiascos of last generation. NV fans might be concerned that a Titan X Black or 980 ti is right around the corner and without DP the compute market may not find it as useful as the previous generation Titan was.

The real question is, is this card worth $1k to more than a select few and how many cards does NV expect to ship and sell? I wonder how much market research was done to choose this price point.

Can anyone pull a good estimate of how many Titan chips will have defects that would still enable it to be a 980 ti gpu? Not sure what kind of yields NV is looking at with its current process.
 

ocre

Golden Member
Dec 26, 2008
1,594
7
81
I think those who draw the obvious (but wrong) conclusion regarding the lateness of AMD with a new gen compared to Maxwell as a result of their lower R&D investment need to remember when Fermi was very very late. Was that due to a lack of R&D funds also or do negative connotations don't apply to NV? .

Either way, its coming soon. Hopefully in time for mass availability of 1440/4K screens with Freesync.

My thoughts are a respin, just like fermi.

Has nothing to do with R&D funds. Its just the risk you take when making chips with such a large die size
 

raghu78

Diamond Member
Aug 23, 2012
4,093
1,475
136
From that old leak FIJI ES is like 5% faster than TITANX.It will be indeed very interesting fight.
AMD/ATI is know for bad early drivers so we can expect more performance gain before launch.I still exept FIJI beating Titan by 10%.

yeah if AMD are ahead by 5% I would not be surprised. Anything more and Nvidia are in for serious embarassment. Its time for AMD to take back the lost marketshare :thumbsup:
 

AtenRa

Lifer
Feb 2, 2009
14,003
3,361
136
yeah if AMD are ahead by 5% I would not be surprised. Anything more and Nvidia are in for serious embarassment. Its time for AMD to take back the lost marketshare :thumbsup:

Its one thing to have the performance lead and another to take market share.
 
Feb 19, 2009
10,457
10
76
Did you forget that AMD can also fight back when it has a strong product lineup. remember the HD 4870 and HD 4850. I am foreseeing a similar situation. AMD will gain back what they lost and some more.

http://www.dailytech.com/GPU+Market+Shows+Impressive+Gains/article13294.htm

Don't bet on it happening again. AMD has marketed itself as the cheap alternative and that has a bad image associated with it. They've done this long enough now and also credit to NV for consistently out performing them at the high-end.

If AMD price 390X at $600, IMO, there's plenty of loyal NV users who would folk out $999 for a Titan X just because 1) it's the NV ecosystem tax which is acceptable for them and 2) 12GB VRAM!! 12 is ALOT bigger than 4 afterall.
 

AtenRa

Lifer
Feb 2, 2009
14,003
3,361
136
Did you forget that AMD can also fight back when it has a strong product lineup. remember the HD 4870 and HD 4850. I am foreseeing a similar situation. AMD will gain back what they lost and some more.

http://www.dailytech.com/GPU+Market+Shows+Impressive+Gains/article13294.htm

The vast majority of the GPU market share comes from Entry to $100 GPUs. The Graphics Cards we are discussing here are $100+, not to mention that AMD also has to substantially increase its Mobile GPU sales to increase its total GPU market share.

They may gain market share in Q3 and Q4 with the help of Carrizo though if they will manage to leverage from it.
 

raghu78

Diamond Member
Aug 23, 2012
4,093
1,475
136
Don't bet on it happening again. AMD has marketed itself as the cheap alternative and that has a bad image associated with it. They've done this long enough now and also credit to NV for consistently out performing them at the high-end.

If AMD price 390X at $600, IMO, there's plenty of loyal NV users who would folk out $999 for a Titan X just because 1) it's the NV ecosystem tax which is acceptable for them and 2) 12GB VRAM!! 12 is ALOT bigger than 4 afterall.

Firstly you are assuming the R9 390X has 4GB which is plain wrong. Secondly AMD built the PS4 and Xbox One with 8GB. So AMD will have foreseen VRAM requirements go up as developers increase their texture budgets on the consoles.

AMD designed R9 290X for 4k and it beat GTX 780 Ti with better XDMA CF scaling, higher ROP performance (64 vs 48) and lower frametimes. So you must be extremely pessimistic to think AMD is dumb enough to not increase VRAM on their flagship R9 390X which is a big improvement from R9 290X. R9 390X is also going to sport HBM which will give it the edge at 4k resolutions. AMD must have known better than you to equip it with > 4GB RAM.

If AMD were only bothered with being the cheap alternative why go through the efforts to design a GPU which matches or beats GTX Titan-X and comes with a closed loop cooling solution for lower temps/noise. AMD is making efforts to improve their product quality, performance and the market perception around their brand and products. :thumbsup:
 
Feb 19, 2009
10,457
10
76
Not really:


I saw that, I think its been awhile ago. There's one from a few years back IIRC from an NV financial presentation, that said the majority of dGPU revenue & profit come from >$299 GPU segment, and that price mark is the "new mid-range", rather than the older times where $199 used to be that segment.
 
Feb 19, 2009
10,457
10
76
Firstly you are assuming the R9 390X has 4GB which is plain wrong. Secondly AMD built the PS4 and Xbox One with 8GB. So AMD will have foreseen VRAM requirements go up as developers increase their texture budgets on the consoles.

All signs point to HBM 4GB, perhaps HBM has moved faster than scheduled, perhaps not. I definitely think the next step up to 8GB would make it a killer GPU for 4K gaming CF.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |