Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Gtx Titan Or Wait For Highest End Maxwell Card?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
February 20, 2013 4:33:03 PM

Hey guys,hope everybody's doing aright. Can anyone advise me on whether to just get a single GTX Titan or wait to purchase the highest end Maxwell gpu when that launches? The Titan seems to be quite a beast but if Maxwell is right around the corner in 2014....it kind of seems to be a waist of money. Maybe someone can help me think about this in the most logical way? Thanks
February 20, 2013 4:41:13 PM

This is purely my personal opinion but the Titan seems like a pointless product. Little more than a collector's edition type card. If you have the money for a Titan then you can probably afford the 690 which from what I've read is still better. If you can afford two Titans, You can afford two 690s..etc. The titan may have an advantage in a multi card set up's due to being a single chip card but really, does it matter at that point?

I'm waiting for the next generation of cards to come out and I'm willing to bet that SLI'ing one of the new cards will beat the Titan or 690 for less money.

Edit: Keep in mind it may be a long wait...
Score
0
February 20, 2013 5:06:45 PM

I think a single Titan would be great for 3 Monitor surround setups. And depending on compute, it may be a heck of a card for rendering as well. Otherwise, its too pricey for what it is.
Score
0
Related resources
Anonymous
a c 117 U Graphics card
February 20, 2013 6:22:03 PM

BigMack70 said:
Titan is way too slow to handle triple monitor setups on its own.

alright mack after seeing your posts in multiple threads i am calling your bullshit.

the card has not even been officially released or tested. nor do you seem to know that the titan will be able to get much higher overclocks than any kepler card; a few sites have already stated such without breaking NDAs. your disdain for keplar and nvidia has been well noted, but lets stick to facts here, huh?
Score
0
Anonymous
a c 117 U Graphics card
February 20, 2013 6:44:49 PM

BigMack70 said:
Seeing as how a 690 can't max games out on triple monitor and a Titan is slower than a 690, yeah.

Call BS on whatever you want, but the facts are that you need more power than a Titan for maxing games on triple screens.

And if maxing games is not your goal, then Titan is just an overpriced alternative to things already available e.g. a 680/7970 or any of the dual-GPU options (670s/680s/690/7950s/7970s).

There's no Nvidia disdain here, buddy. Just facts. :non: 


as i said before the card has still not been "officially" released
and also the overclocking with the titan is vastly different that with other kepler cards with being able to adjust the power target based also on temps.

shall i spend some time using the site's search function (especially on the original kepler thread) where you stated your disdain towards nvidia releasing kepler with having locked voltages and iirc stated, "nvidia will never get my money again."
Score
0
February 20, 2013 6:50:36 PM

Anonymous said:
as i said before the card has still not been "officially" released
and also the overclocking with the titan is vastly different that with other kepler cards with being able to adjust the power target based also on temps.

shall i spend some time using the site's search function (especially on the original kepler thread) where you stated your disdain towards nvidia releasing kepler with having locked voltages and iirc stated, "nvidia will never get my money again."




Stright from Tom's who has tested a Titan but can't release the numbers.

Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6 GB: GK110 On A Gaming Card

"1.Pay the same $1,000 for a GeForce GTX 690 if you only want one dual-slot card and your case accommodates the long board. It remains the fastest graphics solution we’ve ever tested, so there's no real reason not to favor it over Titan.
2.The Titan isn’t worth $600 more than a Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition. Two of AMD’s cards are going to be faster and cost less. Of course, they’re also distractingly loud when you hit them with a demanding load. Make sure you have room for two dual-slot cards with one vacant space between them. Typically, I frown on such inelegance, but more speed for $200 less could be worth the trade-off in a roomy case.
3.Buy a GeForce GTX Titan when you want the fastest gaming experience possible from a mini-ITX machine like Falcon Northwest’s Tiki or iBuyPower’s Revolt. A 690 isn’t practical due to its length, power requirements, and axial-flow fan.
4.Buy a GeForce GTX Titan if you have a trio of 1920x1080/2560x1440/2560x1600 screens and fully intend to use two or three cards in SLI. In the most demanding titles, two GK110s scale much more linearly than four GK104s (dual GeForce GTX 690s). Three Titan cards are just Ludicrous Gibs!
Score
0
Anonymous
a c 117 U Graphics card
February 20, 2013 7:20:17 PM

ibjeepr said:
Stright from Tom's who has tested a Titan but can't release the numbers.

Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6 GB: GK110 On A Gaming Card

"1.Pay the same $1,000 for a GeForce GTX 690 if you only want one dual-slot card and your case accommodates the long board. It remains the fastest graphics solution we’ve ever tested, so there's no real reason not to favor it over Titan.
2.The Titan isn’t worth $600 more than a Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition. Two of AMD’s cards are going to be faster and cost less. Of course, they’re also distractingly loud when you hit them with a demanding load. Make sure you have room for two dual-slot cards with one vacant space between them. Typically, I frown on such inelegance, but more speed for $200 less could be worth the trade-off in a roomy case.
3.Buy a GeForce GTX Titan when you want the fastest gaming experience possible from a mini-ITX machine like Falcon Northwest’s Tiki or iBuyPower’s Revolt. A 690 isn’t practical due to its length, power requirements, and axial-flow fan.
4.Buy a GeForce GTX Titan if you have a trio of 1920x1080/2560x1440/2560x1600 screens and fully intend to use two or three cards in SLI. In the most demanding titles, two GK110s scale much more linearly than four GK104s (dual GeForce GTX 690s). Three Titan cards are just Ludicrous Gibs!


excuse me for looking at any review done here at tom's in the recent past as being very low on my list as far as being reputable (tweaktown being bottom of the barrel); that (pre)review in particular.

compare it to others and see how much was missed:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6760/nvidias-geforce-gtx-...
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/geforce_gtx_titan_...
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2013/02/19/nvidia-gefo...
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/nvidia_geforce_...
http://www.techspot.com/news/51680-nvidia-geforce-titan...
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/2143/1/
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-r...

toms's article barely touch on the computer performance nor mentioned that AIB parners will be completly free to adjust the voltage setting with a EULA reflecting a shorter RMA/warranty period since the gpu's life expectancy will be shortened.
Score
0
Anonymous
a c 117 U Graphics card
February 20, 2013 7:31:02 PM

BigMack70 said:
Who put the stick up your butt about this?
(snip)
We have enough leaked info to make reasonable judgments about this card, looniam. I don't know what you're all flustered about.


the stick is seeing all the hate without any real facts. a reasonable judment is one thing, such as, "at this time the titan does not appear to be a very good purchase for gaming because _ _ _ _ _ "

not
Quote:
Titan is a waste of money unless you want to drop a boatload of cash on multiple Titan cards. Single Titan is pointless.


albeit a very small circumstance:
a user needing a card to perform both for a professional work station and gaming. before the choice was a quadro card and no gaming or an AMD card with better compute performance than most gaming cards but still lacking.

a titan can be very much an inexpensive workstation card that will also game with high end cards. so for that small percent it will be far from a waste of money . . . just a reasonable judgement.
Score
0
February 20, 2013 7:42:03 PM

Anonymous said:
the stick is seeing all the hate without any real facts. a reasonable judment is one thing, such as, "at this time the titan does not appear to be a very good purchase for gaming because _ _ _ _ _ "

not
Quote:
Titan is a waste of money unless you want to drop a boatload of cash on multiple Titan cards. Single Titan is pointless.


albeit a very small circumstance:
a user needing a card to perform both for a professional work station and gaming. before the choice was a quadro card and no gaming or an AMD card with better compute performance than most gaming cards but still lacking.

a titan can be very much an inexpensive workstation card that will also game with high end cards. so for that small percent it will be far from a waste of money . . . just a reasonable judgement.



In order to defend yourself you've gone completely off topic now.

Tom's article was in reference to GAMING and even said so in the title. Also, it was assumed the OP was looking for a GAMING card.
Tom's did mention the better compute performance but it isn't relevant to the topic either in the aritcle or this thread. Unless the OP wants a workstation card ofcourse.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
February 20, 2013 7:48:37 PM

gamer2121: Seems like this thread has derailed a little bit.

I notice no one asked you what you want to do with this card? You should have specified in your original post if this is strictly for gaming or is it for a workstation?

If you use Solidworks, plus you do some CUDA simulations, and you also want to play Crysis 3 once in a while, then it could justify the price. In other words, I see this card making sense for someone who needs high computing power both for OpenCL/OpenGL and Direct3D at the same time. Other than that, the entry price doesn't seem justified.
Score
0
Anonymous
a c 117 U Graphics card
February 20, 2013 7:50:39 PM

BigMack70 said:
Just see the Toms article for why a single titan probably isn't a good purchase. It's already been summarized above. And while you may thumb your nose at it, nothing from any other article changes those conclusions. I fail to see how the compute performance matters in this thread.

It's not hating on the card to point out that it's too expensive to have value beyond the niche cases already listed above. And your decision to come in here disputing a claim that a single Titan isn't a great triple monitor solution is just silly.

first of all, my reponse is not entirely based on triple monitor gaming, though that is the post i had replied to my posting and the topic of this tread is about the titan.
Quote:
Hey guys,hope everybody's doing aright. Can anyone advise me on whether to just get a single GTX Titan or wait to purchase the highest end Maxwell gpu when that launches? The Titan seems to be quite a beast but if Maxwell is right around the corner in 2014....it kind of seems to be a waist of money. Maybe someone can help me think about this in the most logical way? Thanks

actually i see nothing about triple monitors in the OP. nor is there any mention of gaming or compute performance. so i do believe that my references that the titan is getting too much hate around here, a overly larger percentage of any forum i am active or lurking on, is more relevant than triple monitor gaming.

and so the paradigm of this discussion is to include only what is stated in tom's article, that nothing else is relevant or matters?

now that is a major facepalm.
Score
0
Anonymous
a c 117 U Graphics card
February 20, 2013 7:53:33 PM

MC_K7 said:
gamer2121: Seems like this thread has derailed a little bit.

I notice no one asked you what you want to do with this card? You should have specified in your original post if this is strictly for gaming or is it for a workstation?

If you use Solidworks, plus you do some CUDA simulations, and you also want to play Crysis 3 once in a while, then it could justify the price. In other words, I see this card making sense for someone who needs high computing power both for OpenCL/OpenGL and Direct3D at the same time. Other than that, the entry price doesn't seem justified.

ding ding ding! we have a winner!

thank you for that.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
February 20, 2013 8:00:08 PM

deathengine said:
I think a single Titan would be great for 3 Monitor surround setups. And depending on compute, it may be a heck of a card for rendering as well. Otherwise, its too pricey for what it is.


Or you could just get a 7970 GHz Vapor-x, which already has enough ram, is 30% stronger than a standard 7970/680, and costs HALF AS MUCH!!!

The Titan is massive fail. It should have 4GB of ram, faster ram, a core clock of 1200, and cost $700. Then it would be the ultimate beast.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
February 20, 2013 8:00:46 PM

save your cash and get a 7970Ghz
Score
0
February 20, 2013 8:02:32 PM

Anonymous said:
ding ding ding! we have a winner!

thank you for that.



Wow, you're a real piece of work.

Here is the hole you dug and now you are are trying to justify it and change the subject.

1. Deathengine says "I think a single Titan would be great for 3 Monitor surround setups"
2. BigMack70 says it's is too slow.
3. You call Bigmack a Hater
4. BigMack70 and I both prove a single Titan will probably not work for multiple monitors.
5. You switch the topic to Tom's isn't a good source and compute power. When this thread is most likly about gaming.
6. Someone points out the OP didn't specify gaming and now somehow that justifies what you said?

Get real
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
February 20, 2013 8:11:44 PM

Score
0
a c 271 U Graphics card
February 20, 2013 8:18:21 PM

Unless the OP chimes in real quick this thread is destined for closure as I can't really see the reason for getting a Titan card at this point in Kepler's life, unless you have a fair chunk of cash and are really in need of a flagship card.
Score
0
Anonymous
a c 117 U Graphics card
February 20, 2013 8:30:39 PM

ibjeepr said:
Wow, you're a real piece of work.

Here is the hole you dug and now you are are trying to justify it and change the subject.

1. Deathengine says "I think a single Titan would be great for 3 Monitor surround setups"
2. BigMack70 says it's is too slow.
3. You call Bigmack a Hater
4. BigMack70 and I both prove a single Titan will probably not work for multiple monitors.
5. You switch the topic to Tom's isn't a good source and compute power. When this thread is most likly about gaming.
6. Someone points out the OP didn't specify gaming and now somehow that justifies what you said?

Get real


BigMack70 said:
Yeah he's just got a stick up his butt for some reason... hopped in here calling BS on things that aren't BS and has since been trying to defend himself by any means necessary.

Anyways this thread was over a long time ago. OP should just wait for Maxwell; Titan is too niche a product.


both of you need to "get real".
i called big mack a hater because he is and has stated in the past why. i had not reffed to triple monitor set ups, mack did. by the way, there still isn't any proof of that until its benchmarked so you both didn't *prove* anything; just speculated; to where i responded with the potential to overclock; just as reasonable as a speculation as using a GTX 690 as an example.
nor did i change the topic to tom's article, you bought that in as a citation and i disputed it's validity with comparing it to other articles. i then gave a perfectly applicable scenario where the titan would be a good purchase; you are both making the assumption that the topic can only be for gaming, though likely but not specified.

in the meantime you both only have come back with a strawman argument that i must have a stick place somewhere in my anatomy or tried to put words in my mouth with a narrative.

wow i guess that means you're right. :p 
Score
0
February 20, 2013 8:45:19 PM

Anonymous said:
both of you need to "get real".
i called big mack a hater because he is and has stated in the past why. i had not reffed to triple monitor set ups, mack did. by the way, there still isn't any proof of that until its benchmarked so you both didn't *prove* anything; just speculated; to where i responded with the potential to overclock; just as reasonable as a speculation as using a GTX 690 as an example.
nor did i change the topic to tom's article, you bought that in as a citation and i disputed it's validity with comparing it to other articles. i then gave a perfectly applicable scenario where the titan would be a good purchase; you are both making the assumption that the topic can only be for gaming, though likely but not specified.

in the meantime you both only have come back with a strawman argument that i must have a stick place somewhere in my anatomy or tried to put words in my mouth with a narrative.

wow i guess that means you're right. :p 


Ya, you fail.

As I said, it has been benchmarked, the numbers just aren't released yet but Tom's recommendations are based on those benchmarks.

Your other references don't counter what Tom's said, they basically say the same thing.

The other scenarios you want to bring up weren't even relevant to the topic. Compute power wasn't the discussion point. Even if it was, 2 7970's would do very well for probably less money.

You called Mack a hater because of his reponse to the multi monitor issue. So unless you joined this thread just to call him a hater, you were disputing what he said about multi monitor setups. I guessing it was the former actually.
Score
0
Anonymous
a c 117 U Graphics card
February 20, 2013 9:40:33 PM

ibjeepr said:
Ya, you fail.

As I said, it has been benchmarked, the numbers just aren't released yet but Tom's recommendations are based on those benchmarks.

Your other references don't counter what Tom's said, they basically say the same thing.

The other scenarios you want to bring up weren't even relevant to the topic. Compute power wasn't the discussion point. Even if it was, 2 7970's would do very well for probably less money.

You called Mack a hater because of his reponse to the multi monitor issue. So unless you joined this thread just to call him a hater, you were disputing what he said about multi monitor setups. I guessing it was the former actually.

of course what benchmarks that toms post will back up what they state. but also there will be several other sites that will be releasing their own benchmarking. i don't know what you read, or failed to read, from the previews of the other sites but most gave a considerable more amount of information that tom's did esp. the anadtech and 3D guru and neither gave a definitive conclusion such as tom's; it would be extremely premature to do so without any data shown to back to up.

but enough about this and that. you keep wanting to throw me in this "triple monitor niche." i know exactly why i replied to mack's post and have stated a few times. and when it comes down to it; me thinks discussing the titan's compute performance is much more on topic than why i replied to mack's post.

kettle meet pot.

good luck with that.

(edit: and out of respect towards mousemonkey's kind warning i suggest that gets dropped)
Score
0
Anonymous
a c 117 U Graphics card
February 20, 2013 9:50:30 PM

BigMack70 said:
Mouse can we just get this nonsense closed down? Sorry you're having a bad day or something looniam...

MM doesn't have to close it, i'll just let it drop.

not about a bad day, it was actually great but thanks for the concern.
Score
0
February 21, 2013 12:19:06 AM

Anonymous said:
MM doesn't have to close it, i'll just let it drop.

not about a bad day, it was actually great but thanks for the concern.


Yeup I'm done too, and I'm sure we all look forward to any further information about the Titan that may come to light.
Score
0
Anonymous
a c 117 U Graphics card
February 21, 2013 8:36:58 PM

raw frame rates:


690 win but based on latency:

Titan win


now that isw a substantial 690 win but again:

titan is smoother.

again raw frame rates, the 690:


but for smoothness:


wash rinse repeat:






the the titan does fall a bit short for a more desirable frame rate (~40+) in some games in a tri-monitor set up. but (a swing here!) much of the ~10% - 20% difference can be compensated by overclocking for an additional 5% - 10% performance increase
GeForce GTX Titan Overclock Guide

and compared to a SLI set up the titan exceeds the 690 quad SLI in both frame rate and smooth game play.
Results: Two- And Three-Way SLI Performance

so for $1K its not a "horrible" option when wanting a single card solution. hell a single titan beats a 7970 tri fire set up in WOW:

:o 

i am done - cheers.

(edit: account queued for deletion)
Score
0
February 24, 2013 12:04:03 AM

BigMack70 said:
I like that you use Toms' data, yet use it to come to a completely different conclusion.

Toms' conclusions are one of the the better summaries about this card, and there is no real reason to pick one up over waiting for Maxwell:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-titan-p...

My take on it is that if you have to open up a thread asking if Titan is for you, there's a 99.9% chance that it isn't.

Anyways, the TPU Titan SLI review is very informative. When SLI/CF are working, a Titan gets absolutely smoked by a pair of 670s or 7970s. When SLI/CF don't work properly (like the WoW example), Titan looks better.


Lol, I believe I see what you mean. Good point ahaha. Think I've made my decision and will hold out for the masterpiece tech that will most likely be Maxwell.
Score
0
February 24, 2013 12:04:22 AM

Best answer selected by gamer2121.
Score
0
!