NVIDIA GeForce Titan With 6 GB Memory and 235W TDP

SLI-756 · *Last edited by SLI-756; 02-10-2013 at 16:40.*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_700_Series

-------

The latest reports of NVIDIA’s upcoming GeForce Titan GK110 mammoth have arrived revealing that the card is confirmed to feature a massive 6 GB memory buffer. Additionally, review samples of the card have already been shipped to various tech blogs including PCPer and TechReport as revealed by News Editor of Rade3D Caveman-jim (Videocardz)...

link is in first post on this page here >
http://www.overclock.net/t/1355652/t...s-revealed/230

Spets · 02-05-2013, 07:43 | posts: 1,437

Going to be one monster of a card.

Fusion_XT · 02-05-2013, 07:43 | posts: 760 | Location: Netherlands

Ow hell yes !!!! If its good its gonna go into my RIG !

HeavyHemi · 02-05-2013, 07:43 | posts: 3,092 | Location: Wooing whilst wearing only socks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLI-756

The latest reports of NVIDIA’s upcoming GeForce Titan GK110 mammoth have arrived revealing that the card is confirmed to feature a massive 6 GB memory buffer. Additionally, review samples of the card have already been shipped to various tech blogs including PCPer and TechReport as revealed by News Editor of Rade3D Caveman-jim (Videocardz)...

link is in first post on this page here >
http://www.overclock.net/t/1355652/t...s-revealed/230

This has already been posted.

SLI-756 · 02-05-2013, 07:49 | posts: 3,138 | Location: Sunny Scotland

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeavyHemi

This has already been posted.

The link in that forum? Or general Titan whisperings? I looked for the previous thread and it wasn't on page one so thought what the hey! folks will wanna see this.
We now know for sure vram size and tdp, where has this been posted already?

Texter · 02-05-2013, 07:54 | posts: 2,147 | Location: Netherlands

TPU's front page has the RAM amount today.

SLI-756 · 02-05-2013, 07:56 | posts: 3,138 | Location: Sunny Scotland

Quote:

Originally Posted by Texter

TPU's front page has the RAM amount today.

Stupid amount, at least for gaming, it'll push the price up too. I'm really not interested now, though the no doubt steep price was always gonna be difficult to manage.
But perhaps it'll push the other GPUs down a bit in price then everyone's a winner

HeavyHemi · 02-05-2013, 07:57 | posts: 3,092 | Location: Wooing whilst wearing only socks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLI-756

The link in that forum? Or general Titan whisperings? I looked for the previous thread and it wasn't on page one so thought what the hey! folks will wanna see this.
We now know for sure vram size and tdp, where has this been posted already?

http://www.techpowerup.com/179605/Fi...-Revealed.html

No we don't know anything more than what we knew a few days ago. It's still all rumor. The link to the supposed information is dead.

SLI-756 · 02-05-2013, 07:58 | posts: 3,138 | Location: Sunny Scotland

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeavyHemi

http://www.techpowerup.com/179605/Fi...-Revealed.html

The extreme 3dmark11 result was the first real bit of info (though someone tried but failed in labelling it a 690 score), then the info arrived about it being in reviewers hands, now this, the actual vram size and tdp.

HeavyHemi · 02-05-2013, 07:59 | posts: 3,092 | Location: Wooing whilst wearing only socks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLI-756

That was the first real bit of info, then the info arrived about it being in reviewers hands, now this, the actual vram size and tdp.

You mean, actual rumors from a dead link.

SLI-756 · 02-05-2013, 08:00 | posts: 3,138 | Location: Sunny Scotland

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeavyHemi

You mean, actual rumors from a dead link.

Best requesting thread shut down and report me at same time.

HeavyHemi · 02-05-2013, 08:05 | posts: 3,092 | Location: Wooing whilst wearing only socks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLI-756

Best requesting thread shut down and report me at same time.

Why would I do that? It's still simply rumors. I'd personally like to see this be true. However based on past history of stuff like this, I'm skeptical. Calm down.

Darren Hodgson · 02-05-2013, 08:18 | posts: 9,721 | Location: England

I have to question whether any graphics card needs 6 GB of VRAM for the average user who isn't running multiple screens. Yes, I know 8xMSAA in some DirectX 11 games can require more than the 2 GB of VRAM available on a standard GTX 660/670/680 but I'd have thought the logical amount would be 4 GB. That would keep costs down and be more than enough for most people running 1920x10xx and 2560x1xxx displays. My guess is that NVIDIA have done this so this card outclasses everything that has gone before it.

I'm strangely unexcited about the arrival of a new graphics card. True, I have GTX 680 SLI which offers faster performance than a single card anyway so any new single GPU card is not going to be as impressive for performance as it is for owners of non-SLI systems. Secondly, until the new consoles arrive in late 2013 (or early 2014), I'm pretty sure that most games coming out in 2013 will not require a monster card with 6 GB of VRAM either. Plus there's no new version of DirectX to wet our appetites.

Texter · 02-05-2013, 08:20 | posts: 2,147 | Location: Netherlands

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLI-756

Stupid amount, at least for gaming, it'll push the price up too.

4GB on a 680 is pointless, 6GB on a GK110 is comfortable.

bemaniac · 02-05-2013, 08:24 | posts: 42 | Location: Portsmouth

So can anyone think of an application that uses 5gb of vram? Maybe max payne 3 over 3x2560x1600 with maximum AA would use up all the 6gb?

Nono06 · **Memory**: 6GB (8-9-8-24-1T)@1870

For me, the pictures coming from chiphell are used of their original context. It is written tesla K20 on it. It is not a geforce but only the tesla cards released few weeks ago.

southamptonfc · 02-05-2013, 08:51 | posts: 329 | Location: UK

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLI-756

Stupid amount, at least for gaming, it'll push the price up too.

The Tesla GF110 has 6GB of RAM, deal with it!

Or would you rather they re-engineered it with 3GB of RAM so it has less than your 680?

SLI-756 · 02-05-2013, 08:53 | posts: 3,138 | Location: Sunny Scotland

Quote:

Originally Posted by southamptonfc

The Tesla GF110 has 6GB of RAM, deal with it!

Or would you rather they re-engineered it with 3GB of RAM so it has less than your 680?

3gb would be better yes, and i'm under no illusion that the 680 is in the big picture anything more than mid-range hardware.
With more vram it means more can go wrong.
Folks should be worried about the limited quantity tbh, and if HH gets one.

Fusion_XT · 02-05-2013, 09:03 | posts: 760 | Location: Netherlands

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLI-756

3gb would be better yes, and i'm under no illusion that the 680 is in the big picture anything more than mid-range hardware.
With more vram it means more can go wrong.
Folks should be worried about the limited quantity tbh, and if HH gets one.

The GTX690 in my country and heck even de GTX680 is nowhere near in full stock at any shop.

So i really hope the Titan will be here and not a ''Paper'' Launch.. meaning i have to wait another month before i can order it.

(.)(.) · 02-05-2013, 09:11 | posts: 2,202 | Location: Logd n jst 2 change avatar

My 2 gtx580's cost me NZ$1600 and i cant even max every game out. Now when looking at whats available at the moment, gamewise, that **** aint right. Should not need to spend that kind of money on gfx cards just to play games that look like metro, the witcher 2 and crysis/2 at 60fps and up.

So unless theres going to be some revolution in gfx sometime soon, well then im not wasting anymore money on gfx cards, as the price vs performance is not there.

southamptonfc · 02-05-2013, 09:57 | posts: 329 | Location: UK

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLI-756

3gb would be better yes, and i'm under no illusion that the 680 is in the big picture anything more than mid-range hardware.
With more vram it means more can go wrong.

Fair enough, they should probably reduce the stream processor count as well so less can go wrong.

SLI-756 · 02-05-2013, 10:01 | posts: 3,138 | Location: Sunny Scotland

Quote:

Originally Posted by southamptonfc

Fair enough, they should probably reduce the stream processor count as well so less can go wrong.

I should have said 'needlessly' go wrong cause 6gb vram is needless.

Undying · 02-05-2013, 10:10 | posts: 2,676 | Location: Serbia

Quote:

Originally Posted by Texter

4GB on a 680 is pointless, 6GB on a GK110 is comfortable.

You mean 6GB on GK110 is pointless and 4GB is comfortable...

Texter · 02-05-2013, 10:21 | posts: 2,147 | Location: Netherlands

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undying

You mean 6GB on GK110 is pointless and 4GB is comfortable...

No both would be comfortable and the former the only option over 3. Unless you want 12.

Darren Hodgson · 02-05-2013, 13:48 | posts: 9,721 | Location: England

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undying

You mean 6GB on GK110 is pointless and 4GB is comfortable...

Agreed.

The average PC gamer, which includes myself, plays games on a single 1920x1200 or 2560x1600 display and simply will not need a card with more than 4 GB for the foreseeable future. By the time they do then the hardware would be obsolete anyway and too slow to run modern games.

It is enthusiasts that want 6 GB for multi-monitor gaming but considering that they probably make up less than 1% of the user base then I have to question whether making the cards stupidly expensive is a sensible thing to do in this economy. I want a powerful high-end card at some point but I don't want one that costs me more for VRAM don't need. The GTX 680 may have had less VRAM than the AMD cards but in retrospect 2 GB was plenty for most people except for mere handful of games. Most games I play barely use more than half my cards VRAM!!!