Worlds Best GPU? I don't think so...

[IsaacDaGrazin]

 

Edit: Rant! I think... never done one before

Got some spare cash burning a sizeable hole in your pocket?

 

So here we have the almighty Titan X!

http://www.geforce.co.uk/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-titan-x

The so called

Spoiler

GeForce GTX TITAN X is the ultimate graphics card. It combines the latest technologies and performance of the new NVIDIA Maxwell™ architecture to be the fastest, most advanced graphics card on the planet.

Surely if its the most advanced its gotta be the best?

But NOPE!

Here we have another competitor entering the arena!

AND HIS/HER NAME IS GTX 980 TI

Spoiler

The Titan X sports a whopping 3072 CUDA cores clocked at 1000MHz (plus boost), paired with 12GB of GDDR5 running at 7010MHz. The 980 Ti trims down the core count to only 2816 CUDA cores (a drop of 8%) and cuts the amount of memory to 6GB GDDR5, all while maintaining the same clock speeds. What that means is that in many cases, the 980 Ti will be less than 8 percent slower than the Titan X, and at a substantial discount.

8% Slower? Damn! I cant live without that! I need to throw a couple extra hundred dollars for the Titan X!

Spoiler

In the Unigine Heaven benchmark at 4K, the Titan X hit an average fps of 27, while the 980 Ti got 25.4. For today's games, the Titan X's 12GB of VRAM is far more than you'll need, even at 4K, and the 980 Ti is able to deliver playable frame rates at 4K.

So you pay what? a couple hundred more for the 'worlds best gpu' and there is BARELY any difference between the two?

2 fps? 3 fps?

Oh my God! wow I can now play at 4k with a giant hole in my wallet and I get a 2-3 fps difference!

Okay so that was a benchmark, yeah its unlikely someone is gonna spend their life 'playing/watching' a benchmark that puts quite a bit of load onto the two,

So lets see some REAL games!

Spoiler

In Shadow of Mordor at 4K, the Titan X hit an average 48 fps; the 980 Ti managed 45.9. As you can deduce from those two comparison, there's not a huge difference between the performance of the Titan X and 980 Ti.

 

Hmm whats that? 48 fps? for the Titan X? and 45.9 for the GTX 980Ti? huh well I gotta have that 2.1 extra fps!

Lets see the Witcher 3! In 4k!

Spoiler

i7-4790k/GTX 980Ti Min FPS: 34, Avg: 38.4, Max: 52,

Nice Job I would say, Keep in mind that is 4k! so it is playable! although 60 fps would have been nice, but yeah lets see how the worlds most advanced gpu performs!

Spoiler

i7-4790k/Titan X Min FPS: 30, Avg: 40.4, Max 50

So pretty close, doing good ill say that

 

Honestly I cant be bothered going on any more xp

What im trying to say people is

SAVE YOUR MONEY!

Get a GTX 980Ti, There is very little difference, and with the extra money you could buy something for your self (or something for your pc) , the only major difference is 2-5 fps and I highly doubt you would notice that or anyone would, there is no point getting a card that is £230 ($333.64) more expensive for such little extra performance, please have a look at this table

there is only 256 extra cuda cores which may be nice to have but there wont be a giant difference between the conformance, and the vram honestly who needs 12gbs of it unless your doing some major video stuff in 4k, heavy games (battlefield, crysis, gta etc....) they cant even use it up. They have the exact same clocks and such

The only thing your paying extra for is some cuda cores and 6gb of vram thats it! (maybe the amazing a$$ look on it with the black)

just look at this

they are the same except from a few thingys varying from 100-300

 

save your money please?

Thank you for reading this!

Source(s)

Spoiler

http://www.geforce.co.uk/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-titan-x

http://www.geforce.co.uk/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-980-ti

http://www.maximumpc.com/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti-review/

http://www.pcgamer.com/nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review/

http://www.amazon.co.uk/EVGA-Nvidia-TITAN-Graphics-DL-DVI-I/dp/B00UVQL25A

http://www.amazon.co.uk/EVGA-SuperClocked-Graphics-DisplayPort-PCI-Express/dp/B00YMI9S9A

https://www.google.co.uk/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&q=230+gbt+in+dollar&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gfe_rd=cr&ei=yk7AVt_wE4X_ccmYp4AJ

 

[HKZeroFive]

I don't mean to be a dick, but I'm sure everybody knows about this.

[DannyRyu]

those are for gaming benches. Other things could use the Titan X better. Rendering etc.

[ServerSide_Drew]

I have a GTX 970 and it does JUST fine with pretty much every game I play and the SINGLE game it struggles with I just play at 1080p. Because 4K is just overkill anyway.

[Castdeath97]

Just now, ServerSide_Drew said:

I have a GTX 970 and it does JUST fine with pretty much every game I play and the SINGLE game it struggles with I just play at 1080p. Because 4K is just overkill anyway.

Erm...no, there is a noticeable difference between 1080p and 4K.

[ServerSide_Drew]

3 hours ago, DannyRyu said:

those are for gaming benches. Other things could use the Titan X better. Rendering etc.

TBH if your going for hard core rendering your better off putting that money into more processor cores. GPUs are for GAMING most rendering applications use CORES over GPU.

[DannyRyu]

Just now, ServerSide_Drew said:

TBH if your going for hard core rendering your better off putting that money into more processor cores. GPUs are for GAMING most rendering applications use CORES over GPU.

Omg. you are soo wrong. SOOOOO WRONG SOOOOO WRONG I can't emphasize that more.

My shitty GTX 960 can out perform an overclocked i7-6700K in rendering. CUDA Cores destroy rendering

[IsaacDaGrazin]

Just now, Castdeath97 said:

Erm...no, there is a noticeable difference between 1080p and 4K.

There's a very big difference between them

[ServerSide_Drew]

3 hours ago, Castdeath97 said:

Erm...no, there is a noticeable difference between 1080p and 4K.

haha I never said there isn't but at the same time 4K is still fairly new dude. I can deal with 1080p if I need to. Might not be the case in a few years but for now I can.

[ServerSide_Drew]

3 hours ago, DannyRyu said:

Omg. you are soo wrong. SOOOOO WRONG SOOOOO WRONG I can't emphasize that more.

My shitty GTX 960 can out perform an overclocked i7-6700K in rendering. CUDA Cores destroy rendering

I'm not completely wrong dude. It COMPLETELY depends on the APPLICATION and its coding. Something like AutoDesk Revit is CODED to use PROCESSOR CORES more effectively than GPU CORES. It also depends on the PROCESSOR.

[VerticalDiscussions]

Just now, ServerSide_Drew said:

-snip-

That reaction he had tough, lmao.

[DannyRyu]

4 minutes ago, ServerSide_Drew said:

I'm not completely wrong dude. It COMPLETELY depends on the APPLICATION and its coding. Something like AutoDesk Revit is CODED to use PROCESSOR CORES more effectively than GPU CORES.

But Graphics rendering. a lot of programs use CUDA cores as well.

my 960 can render this benchmark in 30 seconds while 5960X will take it over 1 minute. I know thats just one thing but yeah.

Adobe premiere other things also benefit from a Better GPU.

[ServerSide_Drew]

3 hours ago, DannyRyu said:

But Graphics rendering. a lot of programs use CUDA cores as well.

my 960 can render this benchmark in 30 seconds while 5960X will take it over 1 minute.

Yeah well it also depends on the processor as well. you put a dual xeon setup up against a GPU with a program like Revit or 3Ds Max and the Xeons will rip the GPU apart because those programs are coded to take full advantage of the processors.

[IsaacDaGrazin]

1 minute ago, ServerSide_Drew said:

the Xeons will rip the GPU apart because those programs are coded to take full advantage of the processors.

Exactly!

[samcool55]

Now go and tell linus!

[ClobberXD]

26 minutes ago, IsaacDaGrazin said:

 

Edit: Rant! I think... never done one before

Got some spare cash burning a sizeable hole in your pocket?

 

So here we have the almighty Titan X!

http://www.geforce.co.uk/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-titan-x

The so called

  Reveal hidden contents

GeForce GTX TITAN X is the ultimate graphics card. It combines the latest technologies and performance of the new NVIDIA Maxwell™ architecture to be the fastest, most advanced graphics card on the planet.

Surely if its the most advanced its gotta be the best?

But NOPE!

Here we have another competitor entering the arena!

AND HIS/HER NAME IS GTX 980 TI

  Reveal hidden contents

The Titan X sports a whopping 3072 CUDA cores clocked at 1000MHz (plus boost), paired with 12GB of GDDR5 running at 7010MHz. The 980 Ti trims down the core count to only 2816 CUDA cores (a drop of 8%) and cuts the amount of memory to 6GB GDDR5, all while maintaining the same clock speeds. What that means is that in many cases, the 980 Ti will be less than 8 percent slower than the Titan X, and at a substantial discount.

8% Slower? Damn! I cant live without that! I need to throw a couple extra hundred dollars for the Titan X!

  Reveal hidden contents

In the Unigine Heaven benchmark at 4K, the Titan X hit an average fps of 27, while the 980 Ti got 25.4. For today's games, the Titan X's 12GB of VRAM is far more than you'll need, even at 4K, and the 980 Ti is able to deliver playable frame rates at 4K.

So you pay what? a couple hundred more for the 'worlds best gpu' and there is BARELY any difference between the two?

2 fps? 3 fps?

Oh my God! wow I can now play at 4k with a giant hole in my wallet and I get a 2-3 fps difference!

Okay so that was a benchmark, yeah its unlikely someone is gonna spend their life 'playing/watching' a benchmark that puts quite a bit of load onto the two,

So lets see some REAL games!

  Reveal hidden contents

In Shadow of Mordor at 4K, the Titan X hit an average 48 fps; the 980 Ti managed 45.9. As you can deduce from those two comparison, there's not a huge difference between the performance of the Titan X and 980 Ti.

 

Hmm whats that? 48 fps? for the Titan X? and 45.9 for the GTX 980Ti? huh well I gotta have that 2.1 extra fps!

Lets see the Witcher 3! In 4k!

  Reveal hidden contents

i7-4790k/GTX 980Ti Min FPS: 34, Avg: 38.4, Max: 52,

Nice Job I would say, Keep in mind that is 4k! so it is playable! although 60 fps would have been nice, but yeah lets see how the worlds most advanced gpu performs!

  Reveal hidden contents

i7-4790k/Titan X Min FPS: 30, Avg: 40.4, Max 50

So pretty close, doing good ill say that

 

Honestly I cant be bothered going on any more xp

What im trying to say people is

SAVE YOUR MONEY!

Get a GTX 980Ti, There is very little difference, and with the extra money you could buy something for your self (or something for your pc) , the only major difference is 2-5 fps and I highly doubt you would notice that or anyone would, there is no point getting a card that is £230 ($333.64) more expensive for such little extra performance, please have a look at this table

there is only 256 extra cuda cores which may be nice to have but there wont be a giant difference between the conformance, and the vram honestly who needs 12gbs of it unless your doing some major video stuff in 4k, heavy games (battlefield, crysis, gta etc....) they cant even use it up. They have the exact same clocks and such

The only thing your paying extra for is some cuda cores and 6gb of vram thats it! (maybe the amazing a$$ look on it with the black)

just look at this

they are the same except from a few thingys varying from 100-300

 

save your money please?

Thank you for reading this!

Source(s)

  Reveal hidden contents

http://www.geforce.co.uk/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-titan-x

http://www.geforce.co.uk/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-980-ti

http://www.maximumpc.com/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti-review/

http://www.pcgamer.com/nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review/

http://www.amazon.co.uk/EVGA-Nvidia-TITAN-Graphics-DL-DVI-I/dp/B00UVQL25A

http://www.amazon.co.uk/EVGA-SuperClocked-Graphics-DisplayPort-PCI-Express/dp/B00YMI9S9A

https://www.google.co.uk/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&q=230+gbt+in+dollar&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gfe_rd=cr&ei=yk7AVt_wE4X_ccmYp4AJ

 

 

Quote

There is very little difference...

 

That's between the reference versions of the Titan X and the 980Ti.

 

The ASUS Strix, MSI Gaming, Gigabyte Windforce, and EVGA, among many other versions of non-reference 980Ti's can outperform the Titan X by even around 10%!!!

 

 

[XCalinX]

Yes the 980 ti has much better value but the even if the Titan X was 100000000000000$ more expensive and only 0.1% faster it would still be the world's strongest GPU. I run a 980 Ti myself, because I couldn't afford a Titan X

[IsaacDaGrazin]

Just now, anandgeforce said:

 

 

That's between the reference versions of the Titan X and the 980Ti.

 

The ASUS Strix, MSI Gaming, Gigabyte Windforce, and EVGA, among many other versions of non-reference 980Ti's can outperform the Titan X by even around 10%!!!

 

 

Use snip please!

Yeah 10% will do good but what is the point of the Titan X? if many other cards can destroy it even by the slightest bit?

[ClobberXD]

4 minutes ago, IsaacDaGrazin said:

Use snip please!

Yeah 10% will do good but what is the point of the Titan X? if many other cards can destroy it even by the slightest bit?

Although intended for gaming, the Titan X does best in applications that use CUDA cores.

[IsaacDaGrazin]

2 minutes ago, anandgeforce said:

Although intended for gaming, the Titan X does best in applications that use CUDA cores.

Yeah that is true, but if it performs better in that type of task why bother making it for gaming? why not focus it on that type of stuff

[ServerSide_Drew]

3 hours ago, anandgeforce said:

Although intended for gaming, the Titan X does best in applications that use CUDA cores.

Titan X was originally designed for high end server use and was made available for the public as pricing dropped. It actually preforms BETTER for application use than for gaming.

[X1XNobleX1X]

I would say you're 8 months too late.

 

 

It's stupid they removed the double precision from the Titan series of cards, before there was a reason to purchase the Titan class but since they removed it there isn't any point as overclocked cards will outperform the Titan X.

[IsaacDaGrazin]

1 minute ago, ServerSide_Drew said:

Titan X was originally designed for high end server use and was made available for the public as pricing dropped. It actually preforms BETTER for application use than for gaming.

Honestly what were nVIDIA thinking? They could have directed the Titan X towards applications and such instead of making it a gaming card that dosen't perform as well and a 980Ti (a card 'below') performs better in some games even by the slightest bit

[IsaacDaGrazin]

1 minute ago, X1XNobleX1X said:

I would say you're 8 months too late.

Im aware of that

I dont know why I thought of it now but yeah

[ServerSide_Drew]

3 hours ago, IsaacDaGrazin said:

Honestly what were nVIDIA thinking? They could have directed the Titan X towards applications and such instead of making it a gaming card that dosen't perform as well and a 980Ti (a card 'below') performs better in some games even by the slightest bit

Well the titan x WAS released over a year ago now and at the time it WAS the best card by a LONG SHOT but now... *shakes head*