Titan V announced £2700 15TF 12nm Volta

N19h7m4r3 · 12 Dec 2017 at 11:01

We're probably going to see that rumored Ampere line. Volta with the Tensor and compute cut; but the clocks raised significantly; while using GDDR6.

Silent_Scone · 12 Dec 2017 at 11:07

tyler_jrb said:
I don't think we will see hbm2 on consumer grade Volta cards. The cost to perf factor in that region is just not there/required yet.

Not to mention this is not a gaming card and we will likely see lesser cores/faster speed on the gaming variants.

Volta arch and GDDR6 is my guess.

Nice card the Titan V but not at the price it is. Especially in 5-6 months when we will get the old "faster than Titan V" regime, then your left with a card now worth half a bag of soggy crisps.

The Titan V will retain value for quite sometime, so there is some justification in that the FP64 capability of this card are so great, that people will bite your hand off for these come 5 to 6 months. I don't think that really makes it any less stupid to spend £2,700 for what is 15-20% performance over a Titan Xp.

N19h7m4r3 · 12 Dec 2017 at 11:15

Silent_Scone said:
The Titan V will retain value for quite sometime, so there is some justification in that the FP64 capability of this card are so great, that people will bite your hand off for these come 5 to 6 months. I don't think that really makes it any less stupid to spend £2,700 for what is 15-20% performance over a Titan Xp.

It would be worth it if it also had the option to use Quadro drivers; but that would eat into that market too much I think.

Zeed · 12 Dec 2017 at 11:26

So far as i see/ HBM for Gaming customer cards is.... MASSIVE FAIL Looking at FuryX Vega and now Volta...
Does it bring ANYTHING besides higher price ?? Power consumption goes down a bit and ?? Anything ???

Satchfanuk · 12 Dec 2017 at 12:36

Panos said:
Someone already posted that

https://wccftech.com/nvidia-titan-v-crypto-mining-performance-tested-bitsbetrippin-spoiler-monster/

So it has twice the mining performance of a Vega64 for five times the price? Miners will be all over this card

Panos · 12 Dec 2017 at 12:40

Satchfanuk said:
So it has twice the mining performance of a Vega64 for five times the price? Miners will be all over this card

But is an Nvidia, money means nothing. Is the better card

sideways14a · 12 Dec 2017 at 12:46

Nvidia could staple a Geforce badge to a 3 day old turd and still sell it like hotcakes. I have no doubt these will sell out faster than even Vega did to those who cant see past the bling.

Vega · 12 Dec 2017 at 13:01

z10m said:
Try undervolting it maybe.
My 1080 FE is doing 1900mhz at 0.9v hitting max 80% power limit. Didn’t even try to push it further.

No program that I know of allows to read or control the voltage so far. Let me know if you guys find anything, as this card has a nice power section that is under-utilized.

Silent_Scone · 12 Dec 2017 at 13:22

You say 'under utilised', you don't know how much it'll pull when untapped lol!

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 12 Dec 2017 at 15:22

Zeed said:
So far as i see/ HBM for Gaming customer cards is.... MASSIVE FAIL Looking at FuryX Vega and now Volta...
Does it bring ANYTHING besides higher price ?? Power consumption goes down a bit and ?? Anything ???

Most of the memory controller is incorporated into the physical HBM stack meaning more of the physical GPU can be used for other things like more shaders.

However,this is the issue with the GPUs so far:
1.)Fuji only had 4GB of VRAM so needed AMD to actively manage it in drivers,and it was basically a doubled up Tonga.
2.)Vega10 has things like enhanced FP16 and FP64 compute whereas games tend to prefer FP32,so all that is doing is taking up more die space and increasing power consumption.
3.)GV100 has things like enhanced FP16 and FP64 compute whereas games tend to prefer FP32,so all that is doing is taking up more die space and increasing power consumption.

FP16 might be used in more future games,but its going to take time.

Currently we have not really seen a gaming optimised GPU with HBM2.

I think interestingly enough it will be that Intel CPU with an AMD dGPU which has 1792 shaders,but that is most likely going to be TDP limited,so again not such a normal situation.

LoadsaMoney · 12 Dec 2017 at 15:25

Zeed · 12 Dec 2017 at 16:38

Steve as always doing PROPER review instead of same benchmarks that everyone seems to run.. And proper overclocking benchmarks soon

Silent_Scone · 12 Dec 2017 at 16:42

https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3170-titan-v-gaming-benchmarks-async-future-is-bright-for-volta

As for the Titan V specifically, it can certainly be used for games -- but only in the context of, "I bought this thing for work, and sometimes I play games." If you're just gaming, clearly, this isn't the right purchase. Even for those users who have non-scientific uses for their scientific cards, the Titan V does appear to have some frame pacing problems that need to be worked out. We are not yet informed enough on the Volta architecture to root-cause these behaviors, and would suggest that it's either drivers or related specifically to the Titan V.

Seems it's having some pacing issues currently.

Rroff · 12 Dec 2017 at 16:46

Only in some games I think from a skim of the results so far - doesn't look like the drivers are upto speed for gaming use yet.

Kaapstad · 12 Dec 2017 at 17:25

Totally stock even the fan profile

Firestrike

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/23918677?

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 12 Dec 2017 at 17:33

Those numbers with ASync compute look more promising - between 20% to 40% so that kind of indicates DX12/Vulkan performance should be quite solid with the consumer Volta/Ampere CPUs if they have the same basic uarch improvements.

But look at the stock results,it seems the card is definitely not boosting high enough at stock,so overclocking and upping the TDP helps quite a bit.

Here is the website version of the review:

https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/...marks-async-future-is-bright-for-volta/page-2

We’re entering territory of informed speculation. Please be aware that, from this point forward, we’re using our data to fuel conjecture on possible outcomes for Volta.

Purely observationally, based on the data we have presently collected, it would appear that the Titan V has two primary behaviors: (1) Applications which are built atop low-level APIs and asynchronous computational pipelines appear to process more efficiently on the Titan V; (2) the Titan V appears to host more cores than some of these applications (namely D3D11 titles) can meaningfully use, and that is demonstrated fully upon overclocking.

Given that overclocks in D3D11 applications produce performance uplift of ~20% (in some instances), it would appear that the high core count becomes more of a burden than a benefit. The GPU needs the faster clocks, and can’t access or leverage its high core count in a meaningful way. The result is that the Titan V begins to tie with the Titan Xp, and that the 1080 Ti closes-in on the Titan V. In lower-level API games, however, the Titan V pulls away by large margins – 27% to 40%, in some cases. The gains are big enough that we retested numerous times on numerous cards, but they remained. Our present analysis is that these applications are better able to spin-off multiple, simultaneous, in-flight render jobs across the high core count, whereas the tested Dx11 titles may function more synchronously.

As for the Titan V specifically, it can certainly be used for games -- but only in the context of, "I bought this thing for work, and sometimes I play games." If you're just gaming, clearly, this isn't the right purchase. Even for those users who have non-scientific uses for their scientific cards, the Titan V does appear to have some frame pacing problems that need to be worked out. We are not yet informed enough on the Volta architecture to root-cause these behaviors, and would suggest that it's either drivers or related specifically to the Titan V.

That’s what we think right now, anyway, and that may change. This is still early in Volta.

Looking at that consumer cards will potentially have some good improvements in DX12/Vulkan games methinks.

Kaapstad · 12 Dec 2017 at 17:39

+90 on the core

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/23918933?

Kaapstad · 12 Dec 2017 at 17:56

+90 Core +60 memory

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14403139

And I have to go to work now arrrh !!!

Silent_Scone · 12 Dec 2017 at 18:28

https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/14403511/fs/14403139

Kaapstad said:
+90 Core +60 memory

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/14403139

And I have to go to work now arrrh !!!

Rroff · 12 Dec 2017 at 18:31

I get the feeling that pipeline and queue depth are configured for optimal compute workloads which might mean the card is waiting longer sometimes (to batch tasks, etc.) than a gaming focused card normally would resulting in inconsistent frametimes, etc. not sure how much software (i.e. driver updates) have an impact on that or whether there is always going to be some intrinsic implications in that respect hardware wise.