Geforce Titan rumours.

melmac · 8 Feb 2013 at 00:39

LOL sorry, just following the thread over on Hardocp.

Kyle has just said he has got no specs from Nvidia yet about the card. He hasn't got any word at all it seems from Nvidia and he thinks it is going to be a soft launch.

He also says don't expect the 700 series until quarter 3.

So, no Titan just yet??

Colk71 · 8 Feb 2013 at 00:39

Tute said:
Has any top-end card ever been faster than two of the previous generation's top-end?

I just can't see it being faster than the GTX690. If it is then expect to see a cut-down version much like we have with the GTX680.

Yeah, the Voodoo 2

weehamish · 8 Feb 2013 at 00:52

GTX 8800 was a pretty big leap forward.

Gregster · 8 Feb 2013 at 00:52

melmac said:
LOL sorry, just following the thread over on Hardocp.

Kyle has just said he has got no specs from Nvidia yet about the card. He hasn't got any word at all it seems from Nvidia and he thinks it is going to be a soft launch.

He also says don't expect the 700 series until quarter 3.

So, no Titan just yet??

Nvidia do keep their cards close their chests. Kyle knows as much as us and I take what he says with a pinch of salt.

He will post something completely contradictory and then when it is released, he will claim he is right again. Cover all the bases and then you can be right all the time

weehamish · 8 Feb 2013 at 00:56

But i still dont get you greg how can it be 85% of a 690 but not sli 680s? when the 690 is 2x 680s on one chip?

I thought there was nothing between them?

Jakus · 8 Feb 2013 at 01:42

weehamish said:
But i still dont get you greg how can it be 85% of a 690 but not sli 680s? when the 690 is 2x 680s on one chip?

I thought there was nothing between them?

Sssh....your not supposed to notice that

Kaapstad · 8 Feb 2013 at 03:49

People keep talking about what the performance of a gtx 690 is compared to the Titan. Have a look at this leaderboard and see what cards are number one, it not HD 7970s or GTX 680s

http://www.3dmark.com/hall-of-fame/3dmark-11-top-performance-preset/

Gregster · 8 Feb 2013 at 06:43

Nice Kaap.

At Hamish, the reference of 85% the power of a 690 is used because it is a constant format. If they was to say SLI 680's, other variables need to be considered such as, PCI-E lane speeds, what 680's were used etc etc and it confuses the whole thing (like it is doing with you).

There is 4 different 690's for sale on OcUK and everyone has the same clock speeds. There is 16 different 680's with only 3 having the same clock speeds. This is why you can't compare SLI 680's. If you compare my cards in SLI to a 690, Titan would never be 85% the performance.

Do you get me now?

Kaapstad · 8 Feb 2013 at 08:34

gregster said:
Nice Kaap.

At Hamish, the reference of 85% the power of a 690 is used because it is a constant format. If they was to say SLI 680's, other variables need to be considered such as, PCI-E lane speeds, what 680's were used etc etc and it confuses the whole thing (like it is doing with you).

There is 4 different 690's for sale on OcUK and everyone has the same clock speeds. There is 16 different 680's with only 3 having the same clock speeds. This is why you can't compare SLI 680's. If you compare my cards in SLI to a 690, Titan would never be 85% the performance.

Do you get me now?

+1

When you compare a GTX 690 to GTX 680 sli it should be against the ref design. When you do that they are on equal terms when it comes to overclocking. With none ref designs like the MSE lightning its a different story as they have more volts and better coolers than the ref design and so the GTX 690 can not compete.

GTA767 · 8 Feb 2013 at 09:36

sorry guys but at 900 price tag that's ridiculous

i have bought msi 680 lightening for 850 Lari its about 310 pounds at relese date

i have a chance to buy another for that price and i had them in sli and any game was shining

my pc spec below

so why i have to sell my precious for 400 baxs and add another 500 baxs plus vat to buy only 70% power of 680s

there is no logic

i think that price will be maxs 550-600

nvidia will stop produce 690 and thats all

its just my opinion

Bacon? · 8 Feb 2013 at 09:41

This has been said many times....

You cant compare dual GPU's to a single GPU!

THis is a performance chip, its not designed to be economical and people who are saying "SLI 680's are better" its not designed for you either.

GTA767 · 8 Feb 2013 at 09:49

i am using that baby to play bf 3 dirt 3 thats all

in dirt 3 i have 120 fps

in bf3 75-90

so i just need card to have solid 120 fps in bf3

and if nvidia really has that powerful chip for 600 baxs i will buy and watercool it

i just miss my watercooled gpu

Bacon? · 8 Feb 2013 at 09:51

Well I have no idea how much a bax is but they wont be cheap.

+£600 is my estimate for a price of a reference Titan.

Jakus · 8 Feb 2013 at 11:16

Kaapstad said:
+1

When you compare a GTX 690 to GTX 680 sli it should be against the ref design. When you do that they are on equal terms when it comes to overclocking. With none ref designs like the MSE lightning its a different story as they have more volts and better coolers than the ref design and so the GTX 690 can not compete.

When does anyone around here compare like for like

"get a 670/7950 it's as fast a 680/7970" etc..

Reference vs Reference averaged across all the Games and resolutions is the only fair way, I agree

Rusty0611 · 8 Feb 2013 at 11:27

JAKUS said:
When does anyone around here compare like for like "get a 670/7950 it's as fast a 680/7970" etc..

Reference vs Reference averaged across all the Games and resolutions is the only fair way, I agree

Well as it's within 5% clock for clock it's where the sensible money is at. To the eye they are as fast as their elder brother. Benchmarks is the only real difference. Having owned both a 680 and a 7950 I am speaking from experience.

As already explained, averaged across all games is just a simplistic measure for people to gain a very basic summary. Taking it as gospel is just stupid. If the game is just as quick (or very close to) on a 7850 as a 680 then it makes an across the board average completely pointless as it smooths out the real differences between the cards.

RUN4Y0URL1F3 · 8 Feb 2013 at 11:38

2 680s are 15% more powerful than 1 690.

If the Titan has the same raw power of a 690 I'm buying it straight away.

Yaayuh! · 8 Feb 2013 at 11:43

Do i sell the 7970 Matrix Platinum and put some money towards this? Hmm.....

Rusty0611 · 8 Feb 2013 at 11:43

RUN4Y0URL1F3 said:
2 680s are 15% more powerful than 1 690.

No they're not. Not even at stock clocks.

kedge · 8 Feb 2013 at 11:51

I wonder if they will run hot and noisy at full load?, are they on 28nm or lower?.

Duff-Man · 8 Feb 2013 at 12:28

gregster said:
All I can see wrong with those hardOCP specs is the core clock. It will have to be higher to get near 690 performance and it was never going to be as fast as SLI 680's from early rumours.

85% of a 690 still seems viable and doable.

I don't know... 900Mhz core clock at 2688 cores would give it pretty much bang-on 50% more compute power than a GTX680, which alongside the 50% bump in memory bus should probably lead to a nice straightforward 50% bump in performance.

If a GTX690 is (say) 80-85% faster than a GTX690 in most cases, then "85% the speed of a GTX690" equates to around "53% to 57% faster than a GTX680".

At 900Mhz I could see the claimed performance being about in-line. Frankly though, 900Mhz is a little higher than I was expecting for the stock clocks, though the two disabled SIMD cores may help loosen the chip up a little. At 900Mhz I'm expecting a pretty high power draw (upwards of 250W).