Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Feb 21, 2013.
Haha, it beats the 'can it play Crysis' thesis alright
Excellent and very thorough review as always, Hilbert. Thanks.
The Titan looks like an amazing graphics card in terms of performance but the pricing, £825+, here in the UK is obnoxious beyond belief. I really find it utterly repulsive that NVIDIA would ask that much for a single GPU card.
I don't care if it is the fastest card available or whether it is using platimum plating, at the end of the day it is still a single GPU card and, like all technology, it replaces old hardware but is expected to be faster. If this card had been priced at £450-£500, bearing in mind it has 6 GB of VRAM, then it would have been a steal IMO. At £825+ though it can get stuffed! Sorry, NVIDIA, but there you go, I've said it now.
One thing that interested me more about the review was the comparison of the framerates between the four year old quad core i7-965 @ 3.75 GHz and the newer 6-core i7-3960 @ 4.6 GHz. Most of the games differed by only a few fps which surprised me and at 2560x1600, which is surely the minimum resolution this card is aimed at, the difference is 1 fps at most. I guess there really is no point in me upgrading my own i7-920 @ 3.8 GHz to a newer CPU just for gaming; it would be an utter waste of money at this point in time as it looks like most games don't even use four core properly nevermind six. The only reason to upgrade your old i7 CPU would be to have USB 3.0, PCI-E 3.0 and SATAIII. I guess I may as well wait for Haswell next year after all and get another year out of my trusty i7-920.
Thanks for the excellent work as usual Hilbert, not just 1 but 3 articles. You say "Now read this very carefully, the board partners like MSI, EVGA and others get to decide whether or not you may unlock Voltage control."
Do you have any information if there are any differences in this regard for all the reference cards released today by different vendors?
I would hate to buy one to find it was voltage locked!
Nice card thanks for the review Hilbert.
Not as powerful as 690 on air even Hilbert couldnt get his one to go up to 1200mhz on the core.
My 690 does 1215mhz on the cores fully stable and it isnt the best tbh its above average.
Remember not everyone will be able to achieve 1176mhz with there Titan card.
Like i said the other day in another thread once you put a custom block on the Titan it will surpass the 690 even of the 690 is watercooled because of the unlocked voltage.
It just shows how much Nvidia have progressed in the last 12 months since the 690 was released.
Imagine how powerful Maxwell is going to be!
Darren in the meantime you could always drop in another cheap x58 chip?
You could then get those 680's to really work by downsampling on 1920*1200 monitor.
I game now at 2880*1800, makes the card really work!
very through out review H. I like the 965x vs 3970x in the most part less than 1 fps.
My system is long over due an upgrade, but certainly not for that price...
Great review but TITAN sucks monkeys balls due to it's price.
I will stick with GTX 690 for now.
I was actually wondering about getting an X58 CPU with a higher clock so I can push it to 4.0 GHz or higher but is it really worth it considering a 4.6 GHz 6-core i7-3960 hardly gives higher framerates than a 4-core i7-965 at almost 1 GHz slower?
Obviously, I would have the benefit of lower temperatures, since my i7-920 is the original C0/C1 stepping, and more stable performance but for a year I'm not really sure it is worth it as at some point I do want PCI-E 3.0, USB 3.0 and SATAIII so my next upgrade would be as much for those as a more efficient CPU.
Thanks,wawawaw great review,it's a spécial time for the people who plan to buy a new high end card.I don't remember wich card made people so excited.Ok, now let me read the second review(SLI).
Great card but the price is wrong. Should be the same as 690 or touch cheaper. Then I would get one.
As for all the other features, IDGAS. I'm a gamer.
If anything I'd get a 690 or 7950's xfire atm...perhaps if it were cheaper by a good £100...
Still great review Hilbert!
@darren i'd wait for next cpu's..
There's a real danger here IMO is that NVIDIA will set the price for what they think single GPU cards should cost so it will be interesting to see what AMD's next high end card sells for.
It might match the performance of a GTX 690 but that card is almost a year old now and dated tech so it is expected that the Titan would be faster than a GTX 680 anyway (although one review claims it is only 23% on average as increased performance isn't guaranteed to be the same for all games). That extra 4 GB of VRAM shouldn't double the price of the card.
If every new high-end single GPU card is going to be double the cost of the previous one then I will be sticking with mid-range cards in future, which at the Titan's pricing would cost as much as the current high end anyway. I pray that AMD release their next high end single GPU card with similar performance to the Titan but at a much lower cost. IMO, AMD cards have always been better value anyway but only suffer from, in my experience, weaker, less feature packed drivers (no PhysX, no custom AA/SLI flags for easy editing of profiles, no custom ambient occlusion, etc., etc.).
I don't quite understand that logic.
Bearing in mind that on average the Titan is roughly 25-40% faster than the GTX 680 across a range of games, is it really acceptable to charge more than double the price? Other new graphics cards typically show a 25-40% improvement in framerates over their predecessors but AMD and NVIDIA have never asked us to pay twice the price for the privilege of it. I really don't see the logic in their pricing for the Titan at all. Is it only aimed at the stinking rich and people with money to burn?
And, yeah, it has 6 GB of VRAM, which is an excessive amount that few would ever have need of anyway outside of professional use, but I'm sure that doesn't hike the price up THAT much. In a year's time, perhaps less, that £825 card is going to be replaced by something faster and, likely, cheaper so I just couldn't bring myself to pay that much for a single GPU card. Two for SLI, maybe, but not one.
Did you read 690 as 680?
It is about the same or slower than a 690. As for it's extra memory, I will pay a small premium for that.
Ideal price would be no more than £800 imo.
I do admit the prices thus far are not as bad as the preview had us believe and If I didn't blow my cash last few weeks I would have been mighty tempted.
This card is incredibly good 0_0. Two of them and you are set for ever lol.
Do you also have the results measuring minimum FPS with the Titan?
Thats what im interested in !
Other then that an impressive review!
Great card and if your planning on playing on multiple screens or have any plans with the new Metro game then it's a better gaming card than the GTX690, but for most people it will be too expensive compared to other options out there.
Reminds me of the 8800 Ultra, great card but was also around $1000.
No, I didn't. The GTX 690 is a year old now and in PC tech terms it is no longer cutting edge. We also see newer single GPU cards edging closer to matching the performance of the previous dual GPU cards, that is expected, but until now we haven't seen this massive price hike for a single GPU card.
As for the 6 GB of VRAM, it is a shame that reviews do not cover total VRAM usage because I'd be interested to see just how much of that 6 GB is used even for multi-display 5760x1080 resolutions with lots of AA. I bet very few games even top 3 GB and by the time they need 6 GB then the Titan will be too slow to run those games anyway and faster cards will be available.
Re pricing, not Nvidias first time they come up with a high priced monster single GPU. Recall the 8800 ultra which I believe was announced at $999 but quickly came down to around $800 then $650. If NV intends to make a lot of Titans, pricing will have to come down similarly. I just cant see them selling too many at this price.