NVIDIA Unveils The Titan X At GDC 2015

Wag

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 29, 2006
Messages
1,177
I'm running 3 Titans right now. I'll skip the Titan X and wait for the next gen GPUs that are certified for DX12. Hopefully that'll be the 390x (or something else).
 

refraxion

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 3, 2007
Messages
8,423
Yeah, running 2 vanilla titans and I just don't see the need to upgrade considering most games still run like butter.
 

5150Joker

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
4,569
I'm running 3 Titans right now. I'll skip the Titan X and wait for the next gen GPUs that are certified for DX12. Hopefully that'll be the 390x (or something else).

Yeah, running 2 vanilla titans and I just don't see the need to upgrade considering most games still run like butter.

Cool story.

tumblr_n0hom0cCjN1qeuadso1_400.gif
 

Wag

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 29, 2006
Messages
1,177
Well, 3 Titans just about cut it for 4k. I'd like to upgrade to a HDMI 2.0 card but there's no way in hell I'm going to lay out $3k+ for videocards again, especially one that doesn't fully support DX12.
 

datap1mp

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 23, 2006
Messages
138
If this is priced at $999 or close to it, I will bite. I held onto my GTX690 since launch, got rid of it for two 980s, but want a monster 1 card solution.
 

Dayaks

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
9,181
Have the newer Titans got better at scaling? The original had almost no use from the 4th card and it actually hurt performance in some games.

No they are not. I know some forum members are convinced they scale better in some games that are not benchmarked. In all of the games I've seen frame times for (the games you actually need four cards for) they go ape shit. Even average frames stay steady or drop most of the time. I don't expect the Titan X to be improved over the 980, which my previous sentences were based off of.

I am personally struggling. I want to build a computer to last me a few years and get a 34" 3440x1440 (5MP) screen and I just read about Acer coming out with a 144 Hz one. I was hell bent on a single card since I've swore off multi-GPU... but I want that screen... 3x Titan X's would be perfect.
 

Nenu

[H]ardened
Joined
Apr 28, 2007
Messages
20,234
No they are not. I know some forum members are convinced they scale better in some games that are not benchmarked. In all of the games I've seen frame times for (the games you actually need four cards for) they go ape shit. Even average frames stay steady or drop most of the time. I don't expect the Titan X to be improved over the 980, which my previous sentences were based off of.

I am personally struggling. I want to build a computer to last me a few years and get a 34" 3440x1440 (5MP) screen and I just read about Acer coming out with a 144 Hz one. I was hell bent on a single card since I've swore off multi-GPU... but I want that screen... 3x Titan X's would be perfect.
What was cpu use on each core when frame time escalated?
 

Dayaks

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
9,181
What was cpu use on each core when frame time escalated?

980s - 2 way SLI does well most of the time. To your point it was a 3960x. Perhaps an OC'd 5960x would do better. 29% scaled positively for quad sli.

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/NVIDIA-GTX-980-3-Way-and-4-Way-SLI-Performance

980s - This review uses a 5960x. I think it's a terrible review and doesn't have frame times... it's mixed but more positive than pcper. 57% scaled positively for quad sli.

http://us.hardware.info/reviews/562...-4-way-sli-review-benchmarks-metro-last-light

So I suppose if you're hell bent on a game that scales well - it could be worth it.
 

lutjens

Gawd
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
792
Have the newer Titans got better at scaling? The original had almost no use from the 4th card and it actually hurt performance in some games.

I'm curious as well. The complete lack of a performance increase from 3 to 4 cards for the original Titan is why I went with three Titans and never got a fourth.


OH MY, I think my four are in there!

500x1000px-LL-86da523b_titanX_01.jpeg


:D

I'll be most likely buying four of them as well. However, if the scaling is like the last Titan, I'll use three in my system and throw the last into an iTX build or something. ;)
 
Last edited:

spintroniX

Gawd
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
974
I find it more hilarious people are basically saying, "I told you so!" on obviously fake benchmarks. They could have at least made up a memory speed for the 390x.

I'm currently debating:
- 3x 980 Classies
- 1x Titan X
- 3x Titan X

I'm leaning towards 1x Titan X. I barely have time to play games, nevermind fiddle with the damn things.

do what you want... but I don't understand how you go from 1 titan x to 3 titan x

i mean... why not 2 titan x, given that scaling beyond two cards is iffy at best?
 

Sprayingmango

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 20, 2012
Messages
1,259
Ryan Shrout has one sitting on his desk during the new PCPER podcast. Doesn't even talk about it either!! Such a tease.
 

Dayaks

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
9,181
do what you want... but I don't understand how you go from 1 titan x to 3 titan x

i mean... why not 2 titan x, given that scaling beyond two cards is iffy at best?

After rereading the pcper SLI article two way SLI does probably make more sense. I was initially thinking if I was going to fight with SLI make it worth it with trisli...
 

rinaldo00

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 9, 2005
Messages
1,992
No they are not. I know some forum members are convinced they scale better in some games that are not benchmarked. In all of the games I've seen frame times for (the games you actually need four cards for) they go ape shit. Even average frames stay steady or drop most of the time. I don't expect the Titan X to be improved over the 980, which my previous sentences were based off of.

I am personally struggling. I want to build a computer to last me a few years and get a 34" 3440x1440 (5MP) screen and I just read about Acer coming out with a 144 Hz one. I was hell bent on a single card since I've swore off multi-GPU... but I want that screen... 3x Titan X's would be perfect.
Text will be tiny on a 5K screen that size. I think even 3 Titan Xs will not be enough to get good FPS at 5K unless you turn down a lot of settings. I'm looking to go 40 inch 4K.
 

wirk

Gawd
Joined
Sep 2, 2014
Messages
811
980s - 2 way SLI does well most of the time. To your point it was a 3960x. Perhaps an OC'd 5960x would do better. 29% scaled positively for quad sli.
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/NVIDIA-GTX-980-3-Way-and-4-Way-SLI-Performance
980s - This review uses a 5960x. I think it's a terrible review and doesn't have frame times... it's mixed but more positive than pcper. 57% scaled positively for quad sli.
http://us.hardware.info/reviews/562...-4-way-sli-review-benchmarks-metro-last-light
So I suppose if you're hell bent on a game that scales well - it could be worth it.

Has the bottomline reason why SLI scaling beyond 2 is bad been explained? I mean is it drivers, GPU hardware, PC hardware or what?

Text will be tiny on a 5K screen that size. I think even 3 Titan Xs will not be enough to get good FPS at 5K unless you turn down a lot of settings. I'm looking to go 40 inch 4K.

5K has about 14 mln pixels, 4K has 8 mln, that is 5K ~ 1.75 x 4K or in words one needs 1.75 more processing power for 5K to get performance equivalent to 4K . Now let's think that with 2x980 one gets decent performance with 4K. According to rumors single Tix ~ 1.5 x 980. Thus 3 x TiX ~ 4.5 x 980 = 2.25 x 2x980, that is 3xTix has 2.25 times better performance than 2x980 if SLI scaling would be perfect. But even if the SLI scaling is not perfect one needs only 1.75 better performance for 5K which is much less than theoretical 2.25 obtained for 3xTiX. Add to this huge 12 GB VRAM of Titan X which will not hurt. So it seems 3 x Titan X will be OK for 5K. But 27" 5K monitor looks too small to fill the eyes with all those pixels.
 

Dayaks

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
9,181
Has the bottomline reason why SLI scaling beyond 2 is bad been explained? I mean is it drivers, GPU hardware, PC hardware or what?



5K has about 14 mln pixels, 4K has 8 mln, that is 5K ~ 1.75 x 4K or in words one needs 1.75 more processing power for 5K to get performance equivalent to 4K . Now let's think that with 2x980 one gets decent performance with 4K. According to rumors single Tix ~ 1.5 x 980. Thus 3 x TiX ~ 4.5 x 980 = 2.25 x 2x980, that is 3xTix has 2.25 times better performance than 2x980 if SLI scaling would be perfect. But even if the SLI scaling is not perfect one needs only 1.75 better performance for 5K which is much less than theoretical 2.25 obtained for 3xTiX. Add to this huge 12 GB VRAM of Titan X which will not hurt. So it seems 3 x Titan X will be OK for 5K. But 27" 5K monitor looks too small to fill the eyes with all those pixels.

I wish I could say why multigpu doesn't work well all the time. Likely a combination of things. Crysis 3 seems to be the only game that scales consistently over time, but suggests it's possible with proper coding. I don't code video games myself though. AMD has issues as well with quadfire.

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...e-4K-Quad-Hawaii-GPU-Powerhouse/Battlefield-4

Text will be tiny on a 5K screen that size. I think even 3 Titan Xs will not be enough to get good FPS at 5K unless you turn down a lot of settings. I'm looking to go 40 inch 4K.

The 3440x1440 screen is not 5k, it's 5 megapixels. As wirk pointed out 4k is 8 megapixels, so it's less demanding than 4k but still much more than 1080p (2 MP). It's the 144 Hz Gsync on the thing that makes it hard to drive.

This guy is what I'm talking about... Titan X SLI might do the trick:
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1849647
 

Brackle

Old Timer
Joined
Jun 19, 2003
Messages
8,208
Possibly 390x will come with 8gb of HBM memory?!?!?

Fudzilla.....so take it with a grain of salt.

http://fudzilla.com/news/graphics/37258-fiji-radeon-390x-comes-with-8gb

"The decision to go for an 8GB Fiji rather than the planned 4GB version was in part attributed by Nvidia’s Titan X 12GB card announcement. This is just the first part of the story. One of the main reason is that the card is expected to perform so well in 4K gaming, that the 4GB frame buffer could impose a serious limitation."
 

xorbe

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
6,029
Has the bottomline reason why SLI scaling beyond 2 is bad been explained? I mean is it drivers, GPU hardware, PC hardware or what?

Because AFR. If one card can keep up with what the CPU can feed, then additional cards aren't going to help (and likewise 2 to 3, etc). Each additional card needs to be fed, eating into efficiency. AFR shows better gains when the current GPU setup is the major bottleneck.
 

DeadSkull

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
4,482
Possibly 390x will come with 8gb of HBM memory?!?!?

Fudzilla.....so take it with a grain of salt.

http://fudzilla.com/news/graphics/37258-fiji-radeon-390x-comes-with-8gb

"The decision to go for an 8GB Fiji rather than the planned 4GB version was in part attributed by Nvidia’s Titan X 12GB card announcement. This is just the first part of the story. One of the main reason is that the card is expected to perform so well in 4K gaming, that the 4GB frame buffer could impose a serious limitation."

If the benches are true and Titan X is only 25% faster then GTX 980 then.....

ITS OVER NVIDIA FINISHED ALL HAIL AMD ATI GLORIOUS HBM RAM MASTER RACE!!!11!!!1!!!
 

RamonGTP

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
8,150
Possibly 390x will come with 8gb of HBM memory?!?!?

Fudzilla.....so take it with a grain of salt.

http://fudzilla.com/news/graphics/37258-fiji-radeon-390x-comes-with-8gb

"The decision to go for an 8GB Fiji rather than the planned 4GB version was in part attributed by Nvidia’s Titan X 12GB card announcement. This is just the first part of the story. One of the main reason is that the card is expected to perform so well in 4K gaming, that the 4GB frame buffer could impose a serious limitation."

8GB would have me sold. Ultimately I prefer nVIdia cards but the 980 is IMO overpriced for what it is and if you want more than 4GB VRAM the next option is a $1500 Titan X. The 980 needs to drop in price and a card with 6-8GB VRAM needs to slide into it's place. As things stand now, I see a huge gap in NVidia's product (and pricing) line up that the 390x will fill very nicely.
 

rinaldo00

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 9, 2005
Messages
1,992
Has the bottomline reason why SLI scaling beyond 2 is bad been explained? I mean is it drivers, GPU hardware, PC hardware or what?



5K has about 14 mln pixels, 4K has 8 mln, that is 5K ~ 1.75 x 4K or in words one needs 1.75 more processing power for 5K to get performance equivalent to 4K . Now let's think that with 2x980 one gets decent performance with 4K. According to rumors single Tix ~ 1.5 x 980. Thus 3 x TiX ~ 4.5 x 980 = 2.25 x 2x980, that is 3xTix has 2.25 times better performance than 2x980 if SLI scaling would be perfect. But even if the SLI scaling is not perfect one needs only 1.75 better performance for 5K which is much less than theoretical 2.25 obtained for 3xTiX. Add to this huge 12 GB VRAM of Titan X which will not hurt. So it seems 3 x Titan X will be OK for 5K. But 27" 5K monitor looks too small to fill the eyes with all those pixels.

But why go just OK on 5K, (meaning turning down settings) when you might be able to max out settings on 4K?

PS. 2 x 980 on 4K is still just OK, (cannot get 60 FPS with max settings) and I seriously do not believe the Titan X will be 50% better than 980 (Titan X would have to scale perfectly over the 980 given the specs and that never happens) so I think your reasoning has two flaws.
 

wirk

Gawd
Joined
Sep 2, 2014
Messages
811
Because AFR. If one card can keep up with what the CPU can feed, then additional cards aren't going to help (and likewise 2 to 3, etc). Each additional card needs to be fed, eating into efficiency. AFR shows better gains when the current GPU setup is the major bottleneck.

Indeed AFR might be the major issue here but then I would think that this is due to the lack of software optimization for 3- and 4-way SLI and not due to insufficient CPU power. Might be because they see 3-way and 4-way as exotic rarely used configurations.

Reading the document above reveals many potential SLI bottlenecks. For example, this is interesting note from the document above: In all SLI-rendering modes all the graphics API resources (such as buffers or textures) that would normally be expected to be placed in GPU memory are automatically replicated in the memory of all the GPUs in the SLI configuration. If this really means replication of all data then data transfers to the GPUs and amount of VRAM taken grow a lot. Maybe the Titan X 12 GB of VRAM will help with the 3-, 4-way SLI?
 
Last edited:

Liger88

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 14, 2012
Messages
2,657
Support DX12 is not the same as fully DX12 capable


Kinda like how Nvidia never fully supported DX11.x because it didn't include all the feature sets, even those that didn't affect gaming? I'm sure it'll be similar in where older parts will support DX12 in a limited fashion where newer ones will have the final API specs integrated in the hardware.

Either way we're all fucked because once again Microsoft continues the trend of forcing users to upgrade their OS every time there's a new DX version.
 

Araxie

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 11, 2013
Messages
6,456
Kinda like how Nvidia never fully supported DX11.x because it didn't include all the feature sets, even those that didn't affect gaming? I'm sure it'll be similar in where older parts will support DX12 in a limited fashion where newer ones will have the final API specs integrated in the hardware.

Either way we're all fucked because once again Microsoft continues the trend of forcing users to upgrade their OS every time there's a new DX version.

at least this time its free and worthy... unlikely windows 8 for DX11.x features..
 

sk3tch

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 5, 2008
Messages
2,503
How is there no official price, yet? Isn't this going to be at NewEgg on 3/17?
 

TekRok

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 9, 2005
Messages
2,279
What makes me kinda mad is they seem to not include a backplate. It just seems strange that a 970/980 have them, which also have the same footprint as a Titan, but no freaking backplate. While not a big deal to some, for the price its somewhat maddening not to include one.

Maybe its the marketing pieces websites received, but at the same time might be the official one being sold.
 

Michaelius

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 8, 2003
Messages
4,684
How is there no official price, yet? Isn't this going to be at NewEgg on 3/17?

People weren't happy with paper launches - so now everything is hidden behind NDA until cards are in shops ready to be sold.
 

misterbobby

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 18, 2014
Messages
3,814
What makes me kinda mad is they seem to not include a backplate. It just seems strange that a 970/980 have them, which also have the same footprint as a Titan, but no freaking backplate. While not a big deal to some, for the price its somewhat maddening not to include one.

Maybe its the marketing pieces websites received, but at the same time might be the official one being sold.
They made it clear there will be no backplate because they believe it will block airflow to memory chips. 980 does not have memory chips on the back.
 
Top