[Updated] Nvidia releases a new Titan X GPU called "Titan Xp"

[79wjd]

8 hours ago, Carclis said:

They were able to launch the full GP102 at the same price because it was already expensive enough, the 1080ti launch was able to subsidise the costs and the node has had additional time to mature.

 

I completely understand that Nvidia is a company which inherently exists for the purpose of turning a profit, but some of their recent moves have been exceptionally anti-consumer to the point of damaging their integrity and brand. That is the reason you'll find people who dislike them and won't have any interest in buying their products at the prices they are selling for. If they continue with this course of action they'll begin to lose the people who best support them by buying Titan X's/1080's at launch.

Yes, but there would have been a price hike if greed was the motivation for the full gp102 Titan Xp. The fact that it was launched at the same price simply shows that yields are now good enough to satisfy demand for their professional cards AND they're "hybrid"/gaming cards.

 

The people who are upset with nvidia for raising prices due to a lack of competition, or for promoting their own suite of software/tools (gsync, gameworks, etc...) are the same people who are offended by literally everything and everyone around them. Yes, gameworks/closed source projects are obviously not the best thing for the consumer, but then again, why should they if they can make more money otherwise.

[Carclis]

12 hours ago, Morgan Everett said:

Which of their recent moves have been exceptionally anti-consumer?

• Pricing their products a tier above where they should be/misrepresenting what products are intended for (Titan X)
• Outright lying about specifications (GTX 970)
• Segregating the market by trying to get consumers invested in an ecosystem (Gameworks/Gsync) which is in no way superior to the alternatives
• Limiting customer choice by forcing the price of reference (Founders) cards upwards
• Withholding higher tier cards solely to get people to upgrade again

[Carclis]

6 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

Yes, but there would have been a price hike if greed was the motivation for the full gp102 Titan Xp. The fact that it was launched at the same price simply shows that yields are now good enough to satisfy demand for their professional cards AND they're "hybrid"/gaming cards.

 

The people who are upset with nvidia for raising prices due to a lack of competition, or for promoting their own suite of software/tools (gsync, gameworks, etc...) are the same people who are offended by literally everything and everyone around them. Yes, gameworks/closed source projects are obviously not the best thing for the consumer, but then again, why should they if they can make more money otherwise.

Demand from the professional side of the market would have dried up causing them to decide that consumers can now purchase the card, not just an increase in yields AND the Titan Xp is as much a hybrid card as the GTX 1080ti.

 

People that get upset with Nvidia's recent practices are more observant of what's happening around them. If people start accepting things that only screw the consumer over then who is to blame for those things becoming the norm. If AMD released their RX Vega with the top end offering matching the Titan Xp and being priced the same with the rest of their product stack priced accordingly with the competition, do you think people would not complain? It's the same with software. If AMD launched another closed system of software to rival Gameworks you'd have plenty of annoyed gamers.

[Morgan Everett]

4 hours ago, Carclis said:

• Pricing their products a tier above where they should be/misrepresenting what products are intended for (Titan X)
• Outright lying about specifications (GTX 970)
• Segregating the market by trying to get consumers invested in an ecosystem (Gameworks/Gsync) which is in no way superior to the alternatives
• Limiting customer choice by forcing the price of reference (Founders) cards upwards
• Withholding higher tier cards solely to get people to upgrade again

I guess I'm not seeing how any of those things (less your editorialising, anyway) amounts to being exceptionally anti-consumer, the 970 aside. But that's not particularly recent.

[michaelocarroll007]

On 4/6/2017 at 4:51 PM, Not_Sean said:

unfortuantly I don't think ATi has the tech to beat the top GTX's but they will be our saviors as they will smash the 1070/1060 at half the price. 

They aready have there card that competes with the 1060 RX480 and its not half the price and doesnt beat the 1060 overall.  I do think they will continue to offer similar Perf with a little lower pricing Imo but just blatantly saying they will smash Nvidia at half the price is very bold 

[Humbug]

It feels like we are playing a game; how many high end GPUs can Nvidia release before AMD releases Vega.

[VagabondWraith]

27 minutes ago, Humbug said:

It feels like we are playing a game; how many high end GPUs can Nvidia release before AMD releases Vega.

I'm just waiting for a monster GP100 with 7680 CUDA cores.  

[79wjd]

18 hours ago, Carclis said:

• Pricing their products a tier above where they should be/misrepresenting what products are intended for (Titan X)
• Outright lying about specifications (GTX 970)
• Segregating the market by trying to get consumers invested in an ecosystem (Gameworks/Gsync) which is in no way superior to the alternatives
• Limiting customer choice by forcing the price of reference (Founders) cards upwards
• Withholding higher tier cards solely to get people to upgrade again

• Nothing wrong with that, and there's no misrepresentation. 
• They didn't lie about the 970. 
• Yeah, who's ever heard of a company trying to promote their own ecosystem/products. How evil of them.
•  And that limits consumers.....how? 
• If you believe they withheld the Titan Xp to get people to upgrade from a 1080Ti/Titan X(P) to a Titan Xp then you're delusional. The only people who will buy a Titan Xp are those who were waiting for the full gp102 chip or those who were going to buy a Titan X(P) anyway. 

17 hours ago, Carclis said:

Demand from the professional side of the market would have dried up causing them to decide that consumers can now purchase the card, not just an increase in yields AND the Titan Xp is as much a hybrid card as the GTX 1080ti.

 

People that get upset with Nvidia's recent practices are more observant of what's happening around them. If people start accepting things that only screw the consumer over then who is to blame for those things becoming the norm. If AMD released their RX Vega with the top end offering matching the Titan Xp and being priced the same with the rest of their product stack priced accordingly with the competition, do you think people would not complain? It's the same with software. If AMD launched another closed system of software to rival Gameworks you'd have plenty of annoyed gamers.

It doesn't matter whether professional demand is lower or yields are higher, the fact remains that the supply of full gp102 chips is now high enough to satisfy the demand for both the professional and the consumer market -- which wasn't the case before. 

 

Yeah....see above. 

[Carclis]

6 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

• Nothing wrong with that, and there's no misrepresentation. 
• They didn't lie about the 970. 
• Yeah, who's ever heard of a company trying to promote their own ecosystem/products. How evil of them.
•  And that limits consumers.....how? 
• If you believe they withheld the Titan Xp to get people to upgrade from a 1080Ti/Titan X(P) to a Titan Xp then you're delusional. The only people who will buy a Titan Xp are those who were waiting for the full gp102 chip or those who were going to buy a Titan X(P) anyway. 

• If you wish to pay enthusiast prices for a GTX 1080 that's entirely up to you, but the Titan X was definitely pushed for deep learning despite being a glorified gaming card.
• They stated that the GTX 970 had 64 ROPS, 2048KB of L2 cache and 4GB of VRAM. Whilst the statement regarding the VRAM was only misleading the others were complete lies.
• Promoting your own products is fine, but locking them in after they've purchased them is not. You only need to look at the Telco industry to see how shit that is for consumers.
• The consumer has to spend more to obtain a reference card than what would have otherwise been the case, either that or they will have to wait a significant period of time to purchase a cheap reference card. This affects people who have water cooling setups mostly and also those who need a blower style card.
• That's exactly my point. Of course it will only be those rolling in cash that buy Titans, but selling the same halo tier twice because they intentionally gimped the first one isn't exactly a pro-consumer move in any way.

7 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

It doesn't matter whether professional demand is lower or yields are higher, the fact remains that the supply of full gp102 chips is now high enough to satisfy the demand for both the professional and the consumer market -- which wasn't the case before. 

Then only sell the product to the professional market at first until you can meet demand? Release the full Titan Xp product to the market when it's ready instead of trashing your Titan brand?

 

@Morgan Everett Exceptionally anti-consumer is subjective. As a whole all those things amount to pretty anti-consumer activity. None of those things are desirable at all or benefit us in any way.

[Morgan Everett]

5 hours ago, Carclis said:

 

@Morgan Everett Exceptionally anti-consumer is subjective. As a whole all those things amount to pretty anti-consumer activity. None of those things are desirable at all or benefit us in any way.

It's not "subjective", unless you simply mean it's subject to disagreement. I'm still not seeing any evidence of anything that could be reasonably called "anti-consumer activity", save for Nvidia's misleading statements about the GTX 970, which is indisputable. But that's not very recent.

[Carclis]

15 hours ago, Morgan Everett said:

It's not "subjective", unless you simply mean it's subject to disagreement. I'm still not seeing any evidence of anything that could be reasonably called "anti-consumer activity", save for Nvidia's misleading statements about the GTX 970, which is indisputable. But that's not very recent.

I'm saying the extent of it is subjective, but the fact that we are seeing anti-consumer/monopolistic behaviour is undeniable.

[Morgan Everett]

4 hours ago, Carclis said:

I'm saying the extent of it is subjective, but the fact that we are seeing anti-consumer/monopolistic behaviour is undeniable.

I don't see any reason why the extent of it would be "subjective", either. I'm not seeing much, if any, anti-consumer/monopolistic behaviour, so I guess I don't agree it's undeniable.

[Flavio hc 16]

guys...I'm worried....what is coming?

[IceCold008]

Simple fact is that unless Nvidia gets kicked off there Throne but another company. "Hint Red Team". They can pretty much do what they want when it comes to releasing and priceing  of there products.  Its a shitty situation all round for everyone. If you want the fastest piece of tech these days your going to have to buy or wait. 

 

If only Red Team came out with products which is superior the WHOLE BALL GAME would change then. 

[Carclis]

16 hours ago, Flavio hc 16 said:

guys...I'm worried....what is coming?

I think it would be safe to say that it's not a new card for desktops. Many people are speculating that it's the new shield tablet.

[Nephilim]

17 hours ago, IceCold008 said:

Simple fact is that unless Nvidia gets kicked off there Throne but another company. "Hint Red Team". They can pretty much do what they want when it comes to releasing and priceing  of there products.  Its a shitty situation all round for everyone. If you want the fastest piece of tech these days your going to have to buy or wait. 

 

If only Red Team came out with products which is superior the WHOLE BALL GAME would change then. 

Yeah, AMD would suddenly be pricing through the roof, or do we not remember the FX 9590 releasing for $1000?

[AnonymousGuy]

On 4/10/2017 at 0:57 AM, Carclis said:

• Pricing their products a tier above where they should be/misrepresenting what products are intended for (Titan X)
• Outright lying about specifications (GTX 970)
• Segregating the market by trying to get consumers invested in an ecosystem (Gameworks/Gsync) which is in no way superior to the alternatives
• Limiting customer choice by forcing the price of reference (Founders) cards upwards
• Withholding higher tier cards solely to get people to upgrade again

Gsync existed before Freesync by a long margin. There was no alternatives.

[Nephilim]

On 10/04/2017 at 0:16 AM, djdwosk97 said:

There actually already has been a bit of a refresh to Pascal with the 1060/1080 coming with faster memory. But I don't see this as a reason to expect a full refresh of Pascal, unless they decide to launch a gp100-basd Pascal card, but that's a computer focused core, so I don't expect that to likely happen.

 

@Carclis yes the new titans lack decent compute performance, but that's a limitation of the architecture. And the likely reason for a cut down gp102 bases Titan is yields. There is simply no other reason why they would release a cut down card just to release the full core a year later. As for the 1080ti coming out less than a year later, that has historically always been the case.

inb4 GP101 600mm sq. card with no double precision but 5120 CUDA cores.

[IceCold008]

11 hours ago, Nephilim said:

Yeah, AMD would suddenly be pricing through the roof, or do we not remember the FX 9590 releasing for $1000?

Well unless something changes nothing is going to change. Nvidia will keep screwing over there customers. Prices will still be sky high. 

[Jito463]

13 hours ago, Nephilim said:

Yeah, AMD would suddenly be pricing through the roof, or do we not remember the FX 9590 releasing for $1000?

I remember the Socket 939 Athlon 64 x2 4800+ for $1,000.  I bought my 4400+ (same specs, lower clock speed) for a mere $500 at the time.

[Thinkfreely]

Listen, this card is all about E-pene and by golly do we all need more E-pene.

[Dylanc1500]

3 hours ago, Jito463 said:

I remember the Socket 939 Athlon 64 x2 4800+ for $1,000.  I bought my 4400+ (same specs, lower clock speed) for a mere $500 at the time.

Heck, people are angry about the 6950x and forgot about the QX9775 being 1500 and the chipset required two of them.

[Bit_Guardian]

3 hours ago, Dylanc1500 said:

Heck, people are angry about the 6950x and forgot about the QX9775 being 1500 and the chipset required two of them.

I remember those days. Drool-worthy performance for the time, but still...

[Carclis]

23 hours ago, AnonymousGuy said:

Gsync existed before Freesync by a long margin. There was no alternatives.

That's fair enough and it was a great idea too, but in 2015 Freesync was created and was a smarter implementation. At this point you have the whole industry behind Freesync since it's part of the Displayport spec which has resulted in more displays that support it and better interface connectivity (HDMI support as well as Displayport). It's about time they opened up some options for their customers.

[Jito463]

3 hours ago, Carclis said:

That's fair enough and it was a great idea too, but in 2015 Freesync was created and was a smarter implementation. At this point you have the whole industry behind Freesync since it's part of the Displayport spec which has resulted in more displays that support it and better interface connectivity (HDMI support as well as Displayport). It's about time they opened up some options for their customers.

I have to concur.  By forcing their customers to use the proprietary G-Sync, they're only fragmenting the market further.  If Nvidia truly believed their G-Sync technology was the superior option, then they should have no issues with enabling the Freesync standard on their cards, since they could still push and advertise that G-Sync performed better.  And we know from experience, that Nvidia enthusiasts will buy pretty much whatever Nvidia offers up.  The only reason not to enable it, is because they know it's not superior and they want to force people to use their product instead.