NVIDIA Announces GP102-based TITAN X with 3,584 CUDA cores

[Exty]

Nvidia announces the new Titan X , Amd stock increases 11%

[Marinatall_Ironside]

5 hours ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

what about games though?!
i feel such a GPU is complete overkill unless you have a 4K 120hz monitor with current games...i feel the games aren't pushing hard enough ATM and no really good games are coming out anymore...i will not buy another flagship card just like that if there is no bleeding edge games to test it on. what you guys think about that?

I agree. I feel though that no game in recent times has pushed even the top-end GPU hard enough while delivering exceptional scaling going from mid-range to top-end and state-of-the-art visuals. Look at Crysis back in 2006, it did it. It pushed GPU performance further than ever before back in its day. Why can't a modern AAA game do that?

 

Oh wait! It's too much effort to make it scale well and deliver stunning visuals.

 

I do plan on making such a game that can, and will, do exactly that. Give the TITAN X Pascal a run for its money for all glory . And still, story and gameplay will still have their top priorities as well because however demanding and good-looking a game is, it will end up being mediocre if there is no good story or gameplay to back it up with.

 

Before anyone blasts my ass, just because a setting has Low, Medium, High, and Ultra doesn't mean you need to set it to Ultra. If your hardware can't run a game at those settings, lower them. Same goes with Anti-Aliasing and all that other jazz. And yes, there are games out there that run just fine with GameWorks (or whatever you want to call it), and there are games that runs like ass without GameWorks. Just because a game has GameWorks technology built into the game doesn't equal shitty performance regardless. ARMA 3 is a good example. My rig can run that shit really well using the GeForce Experience recommended settings combo. I can hit well over 60 FPS typically and one mission so far, I hit as low as 18. Doesn't mean it runs bad overall. Look at the average FPS in most instances.

[dtaflorida]

20 minutes ago, -BirdiE- said:

Please. Enlighten us with your knowledge of their cost to produce... Don't forget to include all of manufacturing, R&D, and distribution.

Based on market prices of GPUs, the price for that card makes sense.

Considering AMD are still operating at a loss, it's more likely to actually argue the other direction. That GPU prices should be going up on AMD's side. NVIDIA seem to be pricing appropriately if you compare them to AMD. But hey, consumers love cheap electronics! AMD are gonna price themselves out of existence lol.

[i_build_nanosuits]

15 minutes ago, JurunceNK said:

snip!

Star Wars Battlefront and Rise of the Tomb Raider so far i think honestly have the best looking graphics and i want more of that...BF4 was pretty back when it came out...on a GTX 780... but i feel so far not many games have pushed the enveloppe any further...you know

i sincerely hope DX12 and vulcan at least bring just that...i don't care about Async and any of that shit...i want glorious games...that's all!

stupidly high resolution ultra texture quality...i wand my graphics card to BEG for more VRAM...

[Prysin]

47 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

@Pohernori @DXMember

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/13521837?

how about that? 1440p

(putting money aside for an MSI GTX 1080ti Gaming Z)

ofc you need to put money aside. You wasted 600$+ on the least futureproof and least consumer friendly architecture Nvidia has concocted in the last two decades.

[Marinatall_Ironside]

5 minutes ago, Prysin said:

ofc you need to put money aside. You wasted 600$+ on the least futureproof and least consumer friendly architecture Nvidia has concocted in the last two decades.

It's not like you have to upgrade every architecture release. You as a consumer have the right to choose when to upgrade in this realm (unless you're Apple, which in this case, Nvidia isn't playing Apple's game). Why do you think there's people out there with high-end 700 Series GPUs out there still? Why? Because they don't have the need to upgrade right now. They simply don't feel like it because it can play all of their games they own at the desired settings they feel happy about.

 

You don't have to upgrade your GPU simply to play the latest AAA game out there. It's stupid IMO.

[Prysin]

1 minute ago, JurunceNK said:

It's not like you have to upgrade every architecture release. You as a consumer have the right to choose when to upgrade in this realm. Why do you think there's people out there with high-end 700 Series GPUs out there still? Why? Because they don't have the need to upgrade right now. They simply don't feel like it because it can play all of their games they own at the desired settings they feel happy about.

 

You don't have to upgrade your GPU simply to play the latest AAA game out there. It's stupid IMO.

No, you just HAVE to upgrade if you want to get reasonable framerates even at 1080p for the next generation of AAA titles.

 

Mark my words. GTX 970 wont be a 1080p card in two years time. It will be a 720p card if you want to max out details.

980Ti is ALREADY showing signs of losing the 1440p "throne" within 2 years.

 

[dtaflorida]

6 minutes ago, JurunceNK said:

Why do you think there's people out there with high-end 700 Series GPUs out there still?

They simply don't feel like it because it can play all of their games they own at the desired settings they feel happy about.

To be honest, I'm too busy posting on LTT to play games.

 

/rollseyesatmypc

[No Nrg]

6 hours ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

what about games though?!
i feel such a GPU is complete overkill unless you have a 4K 120hz monitor with current games...i feel the games aren't pushing hard enough ATM and no really good games are coming out anymore...i will not buy another flagship card just like that if there is no bleeding edge games to test it on. what you guys think about that?

My aim with a 1080ti purchase is to run an HTPC connected to a 4k TV. If I can consistently run at 60fps max settings I will be happy.

 

You have to think too, the card may not be pushed right out the gate, but eventually developers will begin to utilize the extra raw power they have. My GTX 980 could blaze through everything near max (minus AA) in 1440p/60fps+ when I first got it in Jan 2015. Now I'm having to turn settings down to achieve the same performance.

 

Games and developers will continue to evolve with the increased power given to them. Buying an ultra-fast card now means I'll have an adequate card two years down the road, a form of future-proofing if you will.

[Marinatall_Ironside]

16 minutes ago, Prysin said:

No, you just HAVE to upgrade if you want to get reasonable framerates even at 1080p for the next generation of AAA titles.

 

Mark my words. GTX 970 wont be a 1080p card in two years time. It will be a 720p card if you want to max out details.

980Ti is ALREADY showing signs of losing the 1440p "throne" within 2 years.

 

Not always. It's impossible for a game from 2013 to make a card 3 years later obsolete. It does't work that way unless that game is an MMO.

 

I will agree somewhat with your point on the 970. However it can max out previous games and every mainstream title on the market rather easily. How can my measly GTX 960 4GB FTW GPU from EVGA run Tomb Raider 2013 on Ultimate preset with TressFX and MFAA on while hitting 60 FPS? Because that game, isn't very demanding at all.

 

Your willed ignorance is... impressive. Go ahead and keep upgrading your GPU to play the games already in your library. Do whatever you wish with your money, and keep believing that a game released last year will obsolete the latest and greatest GPU on the market.

[Godlygamer23]

18 hours ago, normpearii said:

Doesn't Nvidia Lock down the Titan's and not allow partner custom cards anyway?

Technically, but last time, Gigabyte found a workaround.

[Prysin]

Just now, Godlygamer23 said:

Technically, but last time, Gigabyte found a workaround.

so did EVGA.

 

They sold the ACX 2.0+ cooler on the side.

[Godlygamer23]

Just now, Prysin said:

so did EVGA.

 

They sold the ACX 2.0+ cooler on the side.

Which I suspect they'll do this time around, although it won't be a completely custom part since the PCB must be reference unfortunately.

[Marinatall_Ironside]

7 hours ago, Prysin said:

-snip-

Dude ya know I have upgrades planned for to bring my shit to spec that I previously had planned for.

 

My point stands: It is fucking impossible for an old game from yesteryear to obsolete the newest GPU you closed-minded punk. It's been proven over and over again, and you don't seem to get it, do you?

 

You think Nvidia and AMD are deliberately and artificially slowing down their GPUs so you can upgrade your GPU like Apple does to their iPhones. They don't do that because it will make them look bad and hurt sales.

 

Last point: I don't upgrade based on the latest architecture release. I only upgrade if I can't play a game I recently bought that's been released in the past month or so. DOOM couldn't run on the GTX 670M without having to downgrade every setting in the game and run it at 720p, and it still couldn't hold a candle to >60 FPS. I knew right there I needed to upgrade to get it to run at higher FPS and settings because I know DOOM was made to run fast and not be so demanding on newer hardware, as it is a fast-paced game at heart.

[Dackzy]

They bumped the price by 200$ yey, so nice, even more value now..... Sure it has a lot of "power" behind it, but come on 1200$. I wonder if it will have thermal problems.. Maybe it will do 4k gaming okay

[Marinatall_Ironside]

3 minutes ago, Godlygamer23 said:

Which I suspect they'll do this time around, although it won't be a completely custom part since the PCB must be reference unfortunately.

The GTX 1080 and 1070 ACX 3.0 and the Superclocked ACX 3.0 versions, last time I checked with the EK Cooling Configurator, all use the reference layout. So that means that the ACX 3.0 and the Superclocked ACX 3.0 versions are merely reference cards with custom coolers. the FTW, Hybrid, Hydro Copper, and the Classified all uses custom PCBs on EVGA's end.

[Godlygamer23]

Just now, JurunceNK said:

The GTX 1080 and 1070 ACX 3.0 and the Superclocked ACX 3.0 versions, last time I checked with the EK Cooling Configurator, all use the reference layout. So that means that the ACX 3.0 and the Superclocked ACX 3.0 versions are merely reference cards with custom coolers. the FTW, Hybrid, Hydro Copper, and the Classified all uses custom PCBs on EVGA's end.

On the Titan series, they weren't able to do anything. It was controlled by NVIDIA.

[Marinatall_Ironside]

4 minutes ago, Godlygamer23 said:

On the Titan series, they weren't able to do anything. It was controlled by NVIDIA.

Well there's the exception to the rule then.

[patrickjp93]

3 hours ago, Notional said:

Vega will be out by Q4/16 to Q1-17. Volta is like 2018. It will be Volta vs Navi.

It is the flagship. It's the highest end GP chip. P100 is a compute card for servers.

 

But yeah, NVidia has been pumping up the prices for years.

Volta is early-mid 2017, and big Vega will not be ready in Q4 2016. Where does everyone get this 2018 crap?

[patrickjp93]

2 hours ago, Notional said:

Sure price to performance falls as you move up the performance ladder. But cards costing over 700€ should not be a thing. There simply is not any reason for it, other than ripoff. Why do you think NVidia sells these Titan cards before launching the x80ti version, that instantly makes the Titan card pointless? Blatant cash grab.

 

Yeah but the Pro Duo was never made a gaming card, but rather a professional card for devs. Compared to a Firepro card, it's a steal. Titan Z... even at half price they couldn't get anyone to buy them. Well it had the Titan name for a reason.

 

NVidia are excellent at pricing and market manipulation, I'll give them that. Just sad that people are so easily manipulated.

There is a reason: business.

 

Humans are stupid. As long as they are, businesses will exploit that. It's social Darwinism.

[-BirdiE-]

4 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

There is a reason: business.

 

Humans are stupid. As long as they are, businesses will exploit that. It's social Darwinism.

I agree with the statement in general. Don't really think that's the case with the Titan XP though.... You get about the same extra performance per dollar by going from the 1080 to this, as you do going from the 1070 to the 1080. Goes against the diminishing returns you'd expect.

 

I do, however, think that's the case with the $1,750 Intel i7-6950X... Such a stupid price for that processor...

[Daegun]

10 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

Volta is early-mid 2017, and big Vega will not be ready in Q4 2016. Where does everyone get this 2018 crap?

Source? Because gp100 enterprise cards aren't releasing until January.

[Notional]

2 hours ago, -BirdiE- said:

Please. Enlighten us with your knowledge of their cost to produce... Don't forget to include all of manufacturing, R&D, and distribution.

Based on market prices of GPUs, the price for that card makes sense.

 

This was in reference to your comment about them later releasing the 1080ti for less. This is what I wrote earlier to someone...

 

So if you don't know, why are you speaking to it? Does the Titan need different drivers to be able to do these things? They are branded under the Geforce logo because it's intended for regular consumers, not enterprise. "Prosumers". If you'll look above, you'll see someone give a perfect example of a use case.

 

You're not... You're giving baseless opinions to support your pro AMD stance. If you have any actual numbers or factual arguments, let me know... But as it stands right now I've shown that it does have a valid target market, the price is not unprecedented, and based on the GPU market the pricing is actually lower than would be expected for that performance.

Don't be silly. Even IF I had such information, it would be industrial espionage to publicise it. But it really isn't that difficult. NVidia is very good at manipulation supply and demand on the market segments. Usually in "the old days", you would up stock of a new card and launch it when you could supply the initial demand, and uphold it with a steady supply as you manufacture the chips.

 

What NVidia is doing, is making a huge chip with low yields, then add (usually) the double amount of VRAM, and call it a Titan. As it is the koth card of the time, and the supply is very low, they can price gouge the hell out of it. When they have suckered enough in to pay 1+k$ and that price segmented demand is depleted, as well as enough defective chips are made to launch a cut down version, the x80ti at half the price is launched. That pretty much kills of the Titan, but they still make it for the few who either needs the VRAM or likes the epeen. 

This is not that difficult to understand, if you have a grasp of simple market and pricing principles.

 

I am. I would critique AMD just as much if they made a single gaming GPU card at 1k+$. I get it when they are professional/server GPU's. Different segments, different needs, VERY different support demands. But a consumer product geared at gamers? Nah.

Lower than expected? What did you expect? That prices on gpu's should just skyrocket? Because that is what NVidia is slowly doing. People were appalled by the pricing of the original Titan. SInce then the price has just gone up, so people are used to it now. 

[-BirdiE-]

24 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

Volta is early-mid 2017, and big Vega will not be ready in Q4 2016. Where does everyone get this 2018 crap?

 

12 minutes ago, Daegun said:

Source? Because gp100 enterprise cards aren't releasing until January.

I was thinking Volta was 2017 as well, but according to Nvidia's roadmap it's 2018...

http://wccftech.com/nvidia-volta-succeed-pascal-2018/

 

Given, that's from nearly a year ago... Things may have changed.

[-BirdiE-]

1 minute ago, Notional said:

Don't be silly. Even IF I had such information, it would be industrial espionage to publicise it. But it really isn't that difficult. NVidia is very good at manipulation supply and demand on the market segments. Usually in "the old days", you would up stock of a new card and launch it when you could supply the initial demand, and uphold it with a steady supply as you manufacture the chips.

 

What NVidia is doing, is making a huge chip with low yields, then add (usually) the double amount of VRAM, and call it a Titan. As it is the koth card of the time, and the supply is very low, they can price gouge the hell out of it. When they have suckered enough in to pay 1+k$ and that price segmented demand is depleted, as well as enough defective chips are made to launch a cut down version, the x80ti at half the price is launched. That pretty much kills of the Titan, but they still make it for the few who either needs the VRAM or likes the epeen. 

This is not that difficult to understand, if you have a grasp of simple market and pricing principles.

 

I am. I would critique AMD just as much if they made a single gaming GPU card at 1k+$. I get it when they are professional/server GPU's. Different segments, different needs, VERY different support demands. But a consumer product geared at gamers? Nah.

Lower than expected? What did you expect? That prices on gpu's should just skyrocket? Because that is what NVidia is slowly doing. People were appalled by the pricing of the original Titan. SInce then the price has just gone up, so people are used to it now. 

Source? Sounds like you're just talking out of your ass...

 

And you don't have to worry about industrial espionage, because you don't have "such information".