Pascal Titan-X Launch

DarrenM343 · 7 Aug 2016 at 16:14

This is what the 1060 should have been
Just thought I'd continue the trend.
Maybe the 480 should have been it too?

.

Good to see it's an impressive card.

Greebo · 7 Aug 2016 at 16:53

Rroff said:
This is what the 1070 should have been (albeit with a little less VRAM) the 1080 should have been a little faster again.

That's a wee bit ambitious. To expect a 1070 for £350 to be 50% faster than a £550 980ti is too much

yoyo59 · 7 Aug 2016 at 18:01

Kaapstad said:
@Gregster

Brutal

Single Pascal Titan @2088/2712
6950X @4.4
2160p
369.05 Drivers

Single Pascal Titan @2076/2702
6950X @4.4
1080p
369.05 Drivers

Single Pascal Titan @2076/2712
6950X @4.4
369.05 Drivers

1080p

1440p

1600p

2160p

First time I have been CPU bottlenecked on a single GPU @1080p in this.

Are you weakening yet, they are fantastic gaming cards.

25% faster than my 1080 score on heaven and only 18% faster on valley

proud of this little 1080 considering its only 1 8 pin :cool:

at the same time kind of disappointed in the X

Rroff · 7 Aug 2016 at 18:13

Greebo said:
That's a wee bit ambitious. To expect a 1070 for £350 to be 50% faster than a £550 980ti is too much

It is what we used to get generation on generation until Kepler turned up. With the Pascal TX nVidia have basically got people to pay £1K for what in any generation before Kepler would have been the GTX470 position card (albeit with twice the VRAM the card in that position would have had).

Combat Fighter · 7 Aug 2016 at 18:14

yoyo59 said:
25% faster than my 1080 score on heaven and only 18% faster on valley

proud of this little 1080 considering its only 1 8 pin

at the same time kind of disappointed in the X

I'm disappointed in the 1080.

It's ****.

Gerard · 7 Aug 2016 at 18:20

Combat Fighter said:
I'm disappointed in the 1080.

It's ****.

Not as if this card is leaps and bounds better, to unlock any potential it may have you need to throw more money at it in the form of a waterblock or aio, whereas third party 1080's with better coolers are readily available.

Strife212 · 7 Aug 2016 at 18:33

Kaapstad said:
They are brutal cards, this is what the 1080 should have been.

Well, quite. That's damning it with faint praise!

Combat Fighter · 7 Aug 2016 at 18:40

Gerard said:
Not as if this card is leaps and bounds better, to unlock any potential it may have you need to throw more money at it in the form of a waterblock or aio, whereas third party 1080's with better coolers are readily available.

Yep and already bought the block, just waiting for it to arrive.

The best is yet to come with the TX. . .

We don't even have voltage control and we are 30% faster!

straxusii · 7 Aug 2016 at 18:41

Greebo said:
That's a wee bit ambitious. To expect a 1070 for £350 to be 50% faster than a £550 980ti is too much

No, it's exactly what we've been used to in PC graphics cards for ever. When a die shrink happens the mid range cards in the new gen should beat the previous top end cards.

The current Titan XP is basically the 480 of it's generation, first top end card. Process isn't yet mature enough so some SMs are disabled to improves yields.

Tragic state of affairs.

Gerard · 7 Aug 2016 at 18:42

Combat Fighter said:
Yep and already bought the block, just waiting for it to arrive.

The best is yet to come with the TX. . .

We don't even have voltage control and we are 30% faster!

Depending on the game and res it can be a lot less, 15% or so is the number floating around compared to a decently clocks 1080.

Greebo · 7 Aug 2016 at 18:42

Rroff said:
It is what we used to get generation on generation until Kepler turned up. With the Pascal TX nVidia have basically got people to pay £1K for what in any generation before Kepler would have been the GTX470 position card (albeit with twice the VRAM the card in that position would have had).

???? WHy havent i upgraded for 4 years then if each gen offered 50% more performance for half the money?

By now we should have had cards 3 or 4 times faster than the 290x for half the price?

We havent had cards offering 50% increase since 8800gtx days from memory.

Combat Fighter · 7 Aug 2016 at 18:44

Gerard said:
Depending on the game and res it can be a lot less, 15% or so is the number floating around compared to a decently clocks 1080.

30% is the number I've seen floating around and will only get better on water.

Keep chewing on them sour grapes.

Rroff · 7 Aug 2016 at 18:53

Greebo said:
???? WHy havent i upgraded for 4 years then if each gen offered 50% more performance for half the money?

By now we should have had cards 3 or 4 times faster than the 290x for half the price?

We havent had cards offering 50% increase since 8800gtx days from memory.

Being stuck on 28nm for twice as long as previous nodes has distorted the picture a bit.

GTX285 to GTX480 was a massive performance jump often around double - averaged over 70% faster IIRC.

If you look at previous cards that have been around 300mm2 and/or using the mid power level variant of a process you are looking at stuff like the 8800GS/GT, 9600GSO, GTS250, GTX460, etc.

Gerard · 7 Aug 2016 at 18:58

Combat Fighter said:
30% is the number I've seen floating around and will only get better on water.

Keep chewing on them sour grapes.

No sour grapes here, i simply refuse to pay for a card with that kind of a ludicrous price tag with a bare bones warranty that needs aftermarket add ons to make it perform close relevant to the cost. And the 30% is best case scenario, against a clocked up 1080 that margin drastically shrinks.

Combat Fighter · 7 Aug 2016 at 19:04

Gerard said:
No sour grapes here, i simply refuse to pay for a card with that kind of a ludicrous price tag with a bare bones warranty that needs aftermarket add ons to make it perform close relevant to the cost. And the 30% is best case scenario, against a clocked up 1080 that margin drastically shrinks.

Makes no difference to me.

Either way 1080 or TX I'd be ripping off the air cooler and slapping block on it.

Only there seems to be more gains doing so with the TX.

Greebo · 7 Aug 2016 at 19:07

straxusii said:
No, it's exactly what we've been used to in PC graphics cards for ever. When a die shrink happens the mid range cards in the new gen should beat the previous top end cards.

The current Titan XP is basically the 480 of it's generation, first top end card. Process isn't yet mature enough so some SMs are disabled to improves yields.

Tragic state of affairs.

Beat or match - yes. Rroff is sayingmid range should be 50% faster than the old top of the range which it's never been afaik

Rroff · 7 Aug 2016 at 19:12

Greebo said:
Beat or match - yes. Rroff is sayingmid range should be 50% faster than the old top of the range which it's never been afaik

That isn't what I'm saying - however traditionally the GTX460 type position cards have been around the previous generation top end and the GTX470 type cards around +50% ish new node to new node up until Kepler with 28nm.

Born_2_Kill_83 · 7 Aug 2016 at 19:25

Gerard said:
No sour grapes here, i simply refuse to pay for a card with that kind of a ludicrous price tag with a bare bones warranty that needs aftermarket add ons to make it perform close relevant to the cost. And the 30% is best case scenario, against a clocked up 1080 that margin drastically shrinks.

Yeah O/C'd 1080 to stock TXP it's going to be isn't it, but then guess what you can just O/C the TXP as well :rolleyes:

and what do you get?? 30%+ again, watercool the TXP and you'll be at 50% with a modded bios, oh and you can't do that with your 8pin 1080 can ya

Had a 1080 it wasn't a great leap in performance from my old TX or for Ti owners either about 10% (pretty poor), the TXP is the leap we all wanted over the last gen. The first 4K card some of us wanted as well and you can't do that with ya 1080 either :-)

yoyo59 · 7 Aug 2016 at 19:28

Combat Fighter said:
I'm disappointed in the 1080.

It's ****.

yeah, they're both overpriced but the X is just taking the mickey lol

if it was legit 40% better than the 1080 it would be worth it, sadly its not

at 20-30% better I can't justify going from 100fps to 130fps or 60fps to 78fps

plus this 1080 is more than enough for my Z35

even when I had the x34 it was handling it nicely

Gerard · 7 Aug 2016 at 19:36

Born_2_Kill_83 said:
Yeah O/C'd 1080 to stock TXP it's going to be isn't it, but then guess what you can just O/C the TXP as well and what do you get?? 30%+ again, watercool the TXP and you'll be at 50% with a modded bios, oh and you can't do that with your 8pin 1080 can ya

Had a 1080 it wasn't a great leap in performance from my old TX or for Ti owners either about 10% (pretty poor), the TXP is the leap we all wanted over the last gen. The first 4K card some of us wanted as well and you can't do that with ya 1080 either

I'm loving the best case scenario diatribe as if its guaranteed to be x amount faster on water, last i checked pc components don't work that way. As for being the first "4k" card, safe to say that's a sweeping statement, it all depends on the games you play, some games like war thunder, sniper elite, doom all run at 4k on ultra settings on a 1080 easily maintaining 60fps.

Go and try to play crysis 3 at 4k maxed on your titan x at 60fps, oh wait it can't, so is it really a 4k card as you claim? It comes down to what you play and the settings you play it at, and if thats factored in a 1080 can also be fine for 4k