NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan X: Discussion, Latest News & Updates.

The new Titan X is coming out around March 17th, according to NVIDIA's CEO. The rumored price is $1349. It will definitely be at least $999. Do you think it's worth it over 980 SLI? There is a rumor going around that it will have 3072 (Maxwell) CUDA cores on GM200. What sort of performance do you think this card will bring to the single GPU market?

Updated: 3/21/2015 (Mar. 21st, 2015).

NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan X - NVIDIA.com

AnandTech | The NVIDIA GTX Titan X - Review



Let the discussion begin!

 

I'm thinking about 50 percent increase in performance over 980gtx I'm buying one going to use it with my 17

 

That's about what I expect as well. Makes sense considering the amount of cores, but I was thinking it could be more than 50% considering the other specs it has.

If you consider this is GM200 and the 980 is GM204, and the fact that the Titan X has 3072 cores (unconfirmed), then it should be at least 50%, if not more. But if it doesn't perform better than or similar to 980 SLI, then I'm not sure if it's worth it (price : performance).

A lot of us were expecting the 980 to full pledged GM200, which would give it more performance over the 780Ti.

 

Nope. Honestly, even a single GTX 980 is overkill performance for just about any gaming resolution.

Even if you were go to with 4K gaming, a single GTX 980 is more than "good enough" performance for just about any game, assuming you turn down some detail options.

The only reason to go with 2x GTX 980 in SLI, or a GTX Titan Z, is if you want to max out detail levels at 4K gaming in every possible game you play. And even then, maxing out details won't give you any realistically noticeable difference in image quality. At that point, you're really just paying for the bragging rights and self-satisfaction of knowing you can run anything on max details. To me, that impractical "satisfacation" isn't worth the money over a GTX 980.

Also, there are rumors that there will be a GTX 980Ti at some point. That will most likely be the sweet spot whenever nVidia releases a "refresh" of their GTX 980 level of part.

 

I'm not waiting for the 980Ti. Hasn't even been any leaks of one, yet. I'm living without a PC right now, so I don't want to wait more than a couple weeks. Looking at probably 2-3 months before launch, if there will even be one.

 

Yea I would definitely go for the single card. UE4 engine won't even support SLI.

 

That's true.

 

First benchmarks released.

 

@J.Dre I highly recmmond you wait for the 3xx series from AMD. I have a hunch that the 390X will actually be able to compete with the Titan X.

 

Definitely been considering it. Despite not having a PC at home, I manage with school computers. Might be worth waiting a bit... Even though I hate it.

Titan Z performance in a single Titan X is pretty good, though.

 

Waiting isn't a terrible idea. Whenevrr AMD's 39x series comes out, it may be a part worth buying. And even if it is not, it will likely be priced at a point where it will drive down the price of the GTX 980s.

But of course, if you want a new toy and want it now, you really can't go wrong with nvidia. Their parts are fast, draw low amounts of power, and run very cool. Its hard to beat that combo.

 

The only thing I want is to be able to game on the highest settings possible at 1080p 120Hz (120+ constant FPS) on the latest games for 2 years or so. That's my goal with this build. The Titan X will do that, but waiting may save me some money.

I'm not into 4k gaming. No way I can justify the costs associated with that.

 

I might have waited for the 390x but their driver issues in nearly every recent game makes me stray far away from AMD. Definitely going for the Titan X now that I know it provides about the same performance as 780ti sli. That's more than enough power for a loong while.

 

Pretty insane graphics scores. 4-way SLI is 48GB's of VRAM, lol.

In the case of having two or more GPU's, waiting for the 980Ti would definitely be in your best interest.

 

Oh. For 1080p, you will be fine with a single GTX 980. 1080p is so easy to drive that it won't be an issue.

To be honest, if you're looking for 120fps because you want to eliminate screen tearing, you will probably want to look I to variable refresh rate tech when it becomes more ubiquitous. That way, having a steady 120fps becomes nearly irrelevant, whether you are on 1080p or do decide to upgrade to 4k one day.

BTW, if you want a monitor upgrade without going 4k, check out 3440 x 1440 21:9 monitors. I just got one of those, and it is AMAZING. I have used 1080p, 1440p, and 4k. But 21:9 is the most significant leap in gaming immersion that I have seen. Plus, it is only 40% more pixels than 1440p, so it is easy enough for one or two GTX 980s to drive.

 

I may move to 4k one day, so I want something with the option of moving that direction. Maybe waiting for the 980Ti will benefit me, then I can just buy another if I want 4k. The thing is, I don't know when it will be launched. It will probably come out after E3, which is way too long of a wait for me.

 

Discussed my options with a friend and he suggested I just save money and grab a 980, and then upgrade next year around this time when the next generation hardware comes out. We both agree there's no need for Titan X's with 1080p, lol.

 

I think the Titan would be a huge waste of money for your needs, especially at that resolution. Some even argue that the price increase of the GTX 970 Vs the GTX 980 isn't worth it either. On average you get from 5-15 extra fps with the 980 vs the GTX 970 for a huge markup lol.

The GTX 980 will definitely be enough for your needs. I am constantly amazed at how easily it deals with every single game on Ultra at 1920 x 1080 resolutions. Now that Ive moved to a mini itx with a GTX 980, even if they did come up with an MXM based laptop without crappy BGA and a nice thick plastic butt I can no longer justify that purchase anyway. I bet the GTX 980 will last you longer than next year and you could go for one of the EVGA versions with stupid high clocks and dual fans!

 

This is why I love the graphics amp I'll keep using this laptop and just upgrade the GPU when I want. Really don't care about the naysayers. They can nay say all they want but I'll will still be happily gaming on this in 3 years

 

3DMark is not a perfect representation of gaming power. Neither is any benchmark for that matter. Doesn't 980 SLI even lose to the 295X2 at higher resolutions on many games?

 

Possibly the thing with AMD is I really like them but through no fault of their own nvidia seems to have made more deals with the developers of the games I play and it would be frustrating to have the games performing poorly just because they are more optimized for nvidia cards.

 

That's right. AMD scales better at 2.5K and 4K.

GameWorks is a cancer to the game industry

 

Decided to go with a 980. My setup is only 1080p, should be good for now. Big upgrade plans soon.

 

After about a month of sketchy benchmarks, leaked specs and pictures displaying cool lighting, the Titan X is here.
AnandTech | The Nvidia Geforce GTX Titan X review
Jayztwocents | The Weirdest Titan X review Ever! - Live 4k Performance Testing
Linustechtips | Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan X - The Best Video Card on the Market?

It's seems to be about what we expected, perhaps a bit more. I still don't think the performance can justify the $1000 price tag though. The only reason to get this card is if you want 4K gaming at 60 FPS and don't want to deal with the dual-GPU 295X2.

Thoughts?

 

There is already a thread about the Titan X in the desktop sub-forum.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/the-gtx-titan-x.772648/

 

The card has launched at $1000.

I'm aware, but I thought I should start a new thread specifically about its launch.

EDIT: Sorry for putting it in the wrong section though. Should I just let this thread die?

 

A moderator can combine / merge them.

@2.0™

 

Am I missing something here? Why would anybody pick any of those over a R9 295X2? Cost less, and appears to outperform many cards at least on paper. Is the real world circumstance different?

EDIT
I see...the 295X2 is like a mini embedded crossfire system, whereas the titan X is a single card system. Makes a little more sense now, especially being a 250W card vs a 500W card.

 

Im waiting for R9 390X before I make my move.
Dat bandwidth with the glorious HBM, plus water cooling with superior temps makes me wet just thinking about it

Here is HBM pictured btw.

 

Cloudfire going AMD? Imagine that.

 

Power consumption, cooling, drivers, ect. There are many reasons to pick the Nvidia, just as there are many reasons to pick AMD.

 

It's really, really hard to recommend AMD for multi-GPU given their snail's pace of driver releases, which means lack of CrossFire profiles for a long time after games come out. They don't have a single new driver in 2015. We're more than 3 months into the year and how many AAA releases have we already had? That being said, for single GPU AMD is fine.

It's a good thing I don't use CrossFire, otherwise I'd be pulling my hair out at the lack of driver support. It was much better a few years ago when AMD stuck with its cadence of monthly WHQL releases. Since they moved away from doing that it seems they release new drivers whenever they feel like it, which is not often.

 

He should be commended for keeping an open mind and being willing to change.

Two years ago you'd have to pay me to go AMD, because I too bought into all the FUDGE about AMD. Then I read, read some more, did even more research, started using my brain, filtered out the BS from facts, and changed my mind. Not to mention after getting scammed pardon me, "featured" by nVidia (remember, 970's memory segmentation was a FEATURE), you couldn't pay me to buy another nVidia card.

Obviously this is not to say AMD doesn't have their own issues, because they do, and just today Cat 15.3 beta (Freesync driver) got delayed, again. -_- (yes I know there was a press driver but it got taken down because no Dying Light CF profile amongst other "subtle differences"). Anyway, this is actually a major reason why I won't be going CF.

But yeah, as long as you stick with single GPU, or are willing to wait for AMD to get those CF profiles out, AMD is competitive with nVidia. I kind of see buying nVidia as kind of like buying an early access season pass lol.

 

The only truly good thing about AMD products (as of late) are their prices. Many more benefits playing for team green, especially long term.

If you're cheap, buy AMD. May love it, may hate it. Don't know until you try.

 

Jayztwocents said in reply to a comment on one of his videos that we wouldn't like the power consumption numbers for the 390X. That might be the cost for getting Titan X-level performance for hundreds less.

 

Going off the reference 290x that's an easy comment to make. I don't think anyone actually knows at this point. My fingers are crossed that AMD can buck the trend. I've heard chatter that the 390x may not actually run that hot.
The temp data on the Titan X shows its not exactly an ice cube either.

 

Oh, it will run cool and quiet as it will probably be water-cooled, but it will still draw a lot of power (relatively speaking of course).

 

The Titan X also draws "a lot" of power. It's really a 275W card, since TechPowerUp found if you increased the power and temp limits to the max you get a free boost even if you keep it at stock.



And if you look through the actual review you'll see the reference blower is pretty much at its limits already, which is why nVidia limited both power and temp.

As for J's $0.02 not liking the power consumption numbers, well that's pure speculation on his part. Also if the 390X matches Titan X in performance, who gives a crap about power consumption. If it's 50W more at stock, and assuming electricity is $0.3 per kWh, even if you ran the thing 24/7 that amounts to an extra $131.4 on your electricity bill.

 

Exactly, on desktop nobody really cares about a little extra power consumption if the performance is there

 

While generally speaking, yes, no one cares, but its still something that you'd want to know (when PSU shopping if nothing else).

 

The thing I love most about these new cards (900 series and Titan X - Maxwell) is the performance scaling. It's just great to see. Hopefully Pascal has nearly perfect scaling.

 

It's OK, I took care of it.

 

Corrected cost per year of $131.4, not per month, premise for outrage disappears / 12x

 

Per year, dude.

And it's been proven that AMD graphics cards double as a space heater during winter time, so you would be saving money on electricity.

 

As octiceps mentioned, $131.4 per YEAR. And that's assuming 24/7 usage at 100% load for the entire year, with electricity costing $0.30 per kWh. AFAIK only Hawaii has rates approaching that level, and most of continental US have rates half of that.

No argument about heat output, but the Titan X is not what I'd call a cool running card either. And you may want to look at how toasty those GDDR5 chips run at when under load:




90+ to over 100C on the memory chips at stock? Yowzers, better hope you bought from EVGA for their awesome warranty.

 

Per year is 12x better than per month, but at $10/month per card, 4x SLI/CF would be $40/month... starting to get up there into the 1 EV car cost / month range

There are peak hour charges for electricity, and then usage peak costs during all hours - where you reach the max base level and then pay more in several tier levels, so even in CA the costs can go up quickly.

Here in California, I worry more about air-conditioning costs. Heat is like $30/mo at most during the "cold" season. Can be $400+ during the peak of the Summer months

If 4 of either card were running in a normal sized room, I might need the air-conditioning during the Winter

 

Yay drought FTW. We be shooting each other for water next year.

 

Yes but, the price delta also goes up by 4 since the price delta exists for each additional card you have in your SLI/CF array, so the per month extra cost is still the same as if you just had 1 card.

I mean yes, on paper it looks like you're paying 4x more per month for 4 way CF vs SLI, but you have 4x the price delta to make up as well. Hope you see what I'm getting at.

 

@hmscott you're blowing it way out of proportion

 

Is anyone here actually planning to buy this card?

Thanks, katalin.