gtx 780 or gtx titan?

[IvIast3r]

title says it all

[CoolBeans]

Wait for 9XXX series.

[Hirad123]

wait, if not 780 if it's only for gaming

[Cs342]

Wait for 9XXX series.

lol do you just copy and paste this into every thread

[CoolBeans]

lol do you just copy and paste this into every thread

Macros usually but I am on my iPad right now.

[Khrass]

780 over Titan for gaming.  Titan is fairly unnecessary for gaming.

[Kirihuna]

I've heard more or less that the Titan is pretty much basically a middle ground between gaming and workstation card.

780 OC beats a Titan in terms of performance.

780 SLI, which is barely more expensive than a single Titan, is better than a Titan.

 

Personally, I prefer Nvidia over AMD, so if it were up to me, GTX 780.

[WoodenMarker]

It depends on what you're doing.

[A/C]

Macros usually but I am on my iPad right now.

 

ahahahaahh! nice one mate xD

 

OT: 780 all day baby, but I am waiting for the 9000 now, and for a reason. I'd suggest you do the same if you can wait.

[Sotti]

IMO the 780 is the best high end option right now for gaming. Single and SLI.

[Atomicnerd64]

What about high resolution gaming like what Logan did with 3X 2560by1440 panels on portrait? Wouldn't the 6GB buffer be an advantage?

[Theo]

i'd get the 780 but also wait for 9xxx series for a potential price drop

[Gishan]

As I've stated in a similar thread - go with the 780.

It has more than enough power and is a better value than a Titan.

[cravinmild]

780 does indeed have a lot of power, more than enough to push its 3gb limit on a single card let alone sli plus it is wayyyy cheaper.... sounds pretty much like a no choice right.  Well its not that easy if you dig deeper and see that Nvidia has really set us up on this one.  Games right now can use over 3gb vram, not just one game (skyrim + mods) but a fair number of them (Hitman Absolution used 3.2GB vram last night for me @ 1080p NOT in 3d), enough that the Titan becomes an option.  The Titan has enough vram to keep you going for years and never worry about vram again BUT you will need two Titans to get playable framrates while using all 6gb vram. 

 

See what NVidia did here,  one cheaper card (780) without enough vram for today/future games or a more expensive option (Titan) where the vram limit has been removed but will require you to use two Titans to max the vram out while keeping playable fps. This is what happens when AMD is not around to keep things in check. 

[ViperGTX88]

A 780 for 1080p gaming should do the job.

[Focux]

lol do you just copy and paste this into every thread

Obvious fanboy's are obvious. Just like how others say a 7950 obliterate the 760.

[Locke290]

Obvious fanboy's are obvious. Just like how others say a 7950 obliterate the 760.

Yeah, I get a kick out of two similar performing cards, how one obliterates the other.

 

GTX 780 is overpriced enough let alone the GTX Titan.  Between those I would grab the GTX 780.

[Focux]

Yeah, I get a kick out of two similar performing cards, how one obliterates the other.

 

GTX 780 is overpriced enough let alone the GTX Titan.  Between those I would grab the GTX 780.

agreed.

[YellowDragon]

Yeah, I get a kick out of two similar performing cards, how one obliterates the other.

 

GTX 780 is overpriced enough let alone the GTX Titan.  Between those I would grab the GTX 780.

 

agreed.

Considering the 7950 comes with an extra gig of vram and can easily trouce a 760 at higher resolution yeh i would say it does obliterate a 760, not to mention if you over clock them both the 7950 will win as it has more headroom. Only if you plan on running bare bones stock and no overclocking should you even go for the GTX 760, that or you want Physx or shadowplay. In raw performance the 7950 is the clear winner, plus its cheaper so theres that the lowest price for a 7950 on newegg is 219 at the moment, so you save $30 and get better performance with a bunch of free games, I call that a steal.

[ltguy]

780 does indeed have a lot of power, more than enough to push its 3gb limit on a single card let alone sli plus it is wayyyy cheaper.... sounds pretty much like a no choice right. Well its not that easy if you dig deeper and see that Nvidia has really set us up on this one. Games right now can use over 3gb vram, not just one game (skyrim + mods) but a fair number of them (Hitman Absolution used 3.2GB vram last night for me @ 1080p NOT in 3d), enough that the Titan becomes an option. The Titan has enough vram to keep you going for years and never worry about vram again BUT you will need two Titans to get playable framrates while using all 6gb vram.

See what NVidia did here, one cheaper card (780) without enough vram for today/future games or a more expensive option (Titan) where the vram limit has been removed but will require you to use two Titans to max the vram out while keeping playable fps. This is what happens when AMD is not around to keep things in check.

You've hit the nail on the head my friend. Nvidia has in fact setup (screwed) the consumer by crippling the card with an abysmal amount of vram. But for most this warning will go completely ignored. Its seems most people investing in video cards these days dont understand that the key to succuessful investing is forcasting. All they do is look at the current games and can card x, y or z play my current game at good fps. If you explain to people that when buying a machine you have to look at past history as well as whats in the pipeline to forcast what your machine will need to play games 1-2 years from now they mock you because this is clearly an impossible task for most. You dont need a magic eight ball to see that if current games can use 3gb of vram that a machine you want to last at least two years will need 5-6 gb of vram in the not to distant future.

But like you said this is what happens when Nvidia goes unchecked. Am i saying everyone should go buy titans.. of course not. They are insanely expensive. But likewise i wouldnt waste my money on the GTX 780 either which has less memory than a 680 and the 770.

[Focux]

Considering the 7950 comes with an extra gig of vram and can easily trouce a 760 at higher resolution yeh i would say it does obliterate a 760, not to mention if you over clock them both the 7950 will win as it has more headroom. Only if you plan on running bare bones stock and no overclocking should you even go for the GTX 760, that or you want Physx or shadowplay. In raw performance the 7950 is the clear winner, plus its cheaper so theres that the lowest price for a 750 on newegg is 219 at the moment, so you save $30 and get better performance with a bunch of free games, I call that a steal.

yea i concede. just can't stand the way some members put the info u mentioned across. seems so amateur like. irks me.

[Locke290]

You've hit the nail on the head my friend. Nvidia has in fact setup (screwed) the consumer by crippling the card with an abysmal amount of vram. But for most this warning will go completely ignored. Its seems most people investing in video cards these days dont understand that the key to succuessful investing is forcasting. All they do is look at the current games and can card x, y or z play my current game at good fps. If you explain to people that when buying a machine you have to look at past history as well as whats in the pipeline to forcast what your machine will need to play games 1-2 years from now they mock you because this is clearly an impossible task for most. You dont need a magic eight ball to see that if current games can use 3gb of vram that a machine you want to last at least two years will need 5-6 gb of vram in the not to distant future.

But like you said this is what happens when Nvidia goes unchecked. Am i saying everyone should go buy titans.. of course not. They are insanely expensive. But likewise i wouldnt waste my money on the GTX 780 either which has less memory than a 680 and the 770.

 

I don't think nVidia crippled anything by using the amount of VRAM they did, especially calling it abysmal.

Don't even try to talk about forecasting, and how to look at things.  You don't even understand the basics of VRAM and how powerful a card needs to be to drive it.  No point having 3-6gb of VRAM if the GPU isn't powerful enough to push it.

 

The whole argument between the GTX 670/760 and AMD 7950, and using that the 7950 has an extra 1GB of VRAM is hilarious.  You won't see a difference between it.  At higher resolutions who cares if the GTX 760 is pushing 23 FPS, and the 7950 can push 26 FPS (just an example) they are both unplayable.

 

You honestly make it seem like VRAM is the most important aspect to a GPU.

 

At stock - 1080P - Relative Performance

100% GTX 760

89% 7950 Boost

148% GTX TITAN

 

At stock - 2560 x 1600 - Relative Performance

100% GTX 760

93% 7950 Boost

158% GTX TITAN

 

 

OH SNAP that extra VRAM really pushed through there.  Gave it a whole extra 4%.

 

Example I suppose:

 

Bioshock Infinite at 5760 x 1080 resolution.

GTX 760 31.1 FPS

7950 29.6 FPS

GTX 770 39.8 FPS

 

The GTX 760 / 7950 are too weak to to make it playable, even with the extra 1GB of VRAM.  Makes no difference.

 

Let's us another example, one that uses a lot of GPU Power and VRAM.

 

Crysis 3 at 5760 x 1080

GTX 760 9.9 FPS

7950 10.5 FPS

GTX 780 14.6 FPS

 

Hmm, again the extra VRAM shows NO improvement because the GPU can't power it.  Even the GTX 780 isn't powerful enough, no matter how much VRAM it has.  There is no such thing as "forecasting" with video cards, its plain and simple.  Either the performance is there or its not, nice try using a few big words to make yourself look "smart" and knowledgeable.

 

I don't need a magic 8-ball to tell you're a "- - - - - - - -" (Give it a shake).

 

PS: The misinformation, ignorance and blind fanboyism I've see on this forum since starting to post here is just bad showing guys, most of you post with no knowledge and sprout that this card and that card obliterates this, or well this has more VRAM so its better.  I expected a bit better from this forum, but really I shouldn't have.  Take care this is my last post.

[ltguy]

I don't think nVidia crippled anything by using the amount of VRAM they did, especially calling it abysmal.

Don't even try to talk about forecasting, and how to look at things.  You don't even understand the basics of VRAM and how powerful a card needs to be to drive it.  No point having 3-6gb of VRAM if the GPU isn't powerful enough to push it.

 

The whole argument between the GTX 670/760 and AMD 7950, and using that the 7950 has an extra 1GB of VRAM is hilarious.  You won't see a difference between it.  At higher resolutions who cares if the GTX 760 is pushing 23 FPS, and the 7950 can push 26 FPS (just an example) they are both unplayable.

 

You honestly make it seem like VRAM is the most important aspect to a GPU.

 

At stock - 1080P - Relative Performance

100% GTX 760

89% 7950 Boost

148% GTX TITAN

 

At stock - 2560 x 1600 - Relative Performance

100% GTX 760

93% 7950 Boost

158% GTX TITAN

 

 

OH SNAP that extra VRAM really pushed through there.  Gave it a whole extra 4%.

 

Example I suppose:

 

Bioshock Infinite at 5760 x 1080 resolution.

GTX 760 31.1 FPS

7950 29.6 FPS

GTX 770 39.8 FPS

 

The GTX 760 / 7950 are too weak to to make it playable, even with the extra 1GB of VRAM.  Makes no difference.

 

Let's us another example, one that uses a lot of GPU Power and VRAM.

 

Crysis 3 at 5760 x 1080

GTX 760 9.9 FPS

7950 10.5 FPS

GTX 780 14.6 FPS

 

Hmm, again the extra VRAM shows NO improvement because the GPU can't power it.  Even the GTX 780 isn't powerful enough, no matter how much VRAM it has.  There is no such thing as "forecasting" with video cards, its plain and simple.  Either the performance is there or its not, nice try using a few big words to make yourself look "smart" and knowledgeable.

 

I don't need a magic 8-ball to tell you're a "- - - - - - - -" (Give it a shake).

 

PS: The misinformation, ignorance and blind fanboyism I've see on this forum since starting to post here is just bad showing guys, most of you post with no knowledge and sprout that this card and that card obliterates this, or well this has more VRAM so its better.  I expected a bit better from this forum, but really I shouldn't have.  Take care this is my last post.

Why would additional vram make the titan outperform a 780 in a game that doesnt saturate the 3gb's of memory to begin with. And maybe you've never been on a system that is vram capped but i have. My 5970 trifire scores 37500 in 3dmark vantage and couldnt play wow @ 5760 x 1080 higher than about 10fps because it had 1gb of vram (and at the time you would have told me no one needs more than 1 gb of vram) while my titan got me 50 fps at the same resolution and quality and scored about 42000 in 3mark vantage. The single titan really didnt have that much more power than my trifire setup but had the vram to handle the game. I also like how your crysis 3 @ 5760 x 1080 doesnt include the titan.. maybe cause the titan yield more than playable fps on crysis 3 even when maxed out.  I am going to go play crysis 3 now maxed out on 3 monitors on SLI titans, you know the ones i could afford because of the job that i got from being ignorant and misinformed.

 

PS: I'm also going to go ponder who i am a fanboy of with my 5970 trifire from ATI and SLI titans from Nvidia.

[Face2Face]

This is the card to beat now - http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/08/14/galaxy_geforce_gtx_780_hof_edition_review#.UhTQCpLVAio

 

These are binned chips and many users are reporting 1300Mhz + on the core. GTX 780 @ 1300Mhz = Beast!

[ltguy]

A single 780 just isnt that impressive, i'd rather have SLI 770's, or SLI 7950's