Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Nvidia announces the new Titan X, A Powerful $1,200 GPU

blueturtle13blueturtle13 Member LegendaryPosts: 12,698
edited July 2016 in Hardware
Nvidia's breakneck GPU release schedule continues today with the announcement of the
 new Titan X, the company's most powerful graphics card yet.
The new Titan X, which Nvidia calls "the biggest GPU ever built," has 12 billion transistors in total — and you'll be paying about $100 per billion. The card will be available on August 2nd in the US and Europe for $1,200, with an Asia release forthcoming.




거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












«1

Comments

  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer Member EpicPosts: 8,847
    That should run World of Warcraft pretty well.
  • mbrodiembrodie Member RarePosts: 1,498
    not even HBM 2... well thats interesting
  • Laughing-manLaughing-man Member RarePosts: 3,648
    Waiting on Quiz to tell me if it's impressive or not.
  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    edited July 2016
    That should run World of Warcraft pretty well.
    Thats the problem wth CPU bound games.....youre CPU bound ;P

    And frankly....25% faster than 1080....lot of people will be dissapointed since since they hyped 50%.

    I called the price (well on 25% faster card than 1080 that was supposed to be 1080ti)....1199$

    Also this is 99% GP100 chip

    http://images.nvidia.com/content/tesla/pdf/nvidia-tesla-p100-PCIe-datasheet.pdf

  • VrikaVrika Member EpicPosts: 6,692
    edited July 2016
    Gorwe said:
    Really, what's the point of these...?

    You can just get 2x r9 390 or r9 480 and be WAY more than set up to play most games on 60 fps 1080p. And that would cost you around $600 tops.
    I don't think NVidia ever meant this to be economical choice compared to anything.

    It's a status symbol.
     
  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Its actually stupidity sambol.
  • PhryPhry Member LegendaryPosts: 11,004
    mbrodie said:
    not even HBM 2... well thats interesting
    Makes you wonder why they would choose not to use it, perhaps the tech isn't ready yet.
  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer Member EpicPosts: 8,847
    As long as this drives the price of lesser cards down.....I'm good with this.
  • ianicusianicus Member UncommonPosts: 665
    Gorwe said:
    Really, what's the point of these...?

    You can just get 2x r9 390 or r9 480 and be WAY more than set up to play most games on 60 fps 1080p. And that would cost you around $600 tops.

    ...who's stupid here?

    (oh right, I forgot, you need these to play with 16x SuperSampling AA on an UHD TV...smh-economics should REALLY become a mandatoy subject in schools!)
    whats the point in running those cards thou when AMD drivers wont even run pong?
    "Well let me just quote the late-great Colonel Sanders, who said…’I’m too drunk to taste this chicken." - Ricky Bobby
  • Abuz0rAbuz0r Member UncommonPosts: 550
    Don't you think it's funny that people will spend $300 to $1,200 on a video card (which is only a % of their overall gaming machine) to play games that they won't play if they have a subscription or item mall that runs them more than $100 / year. I'm guilty too, it just always blew my mind, I see a game is $45 and I'm like I really don't want to spring for that... then I see a video card that needs 2 mufflers and I start seeing if I can scrape together $600...  Then I get it installed and look for free games to play with it.  I think I have about $4,000 in my gaming machine right now, and it's a good one, too bad the games that really utilize it aren't MMO games so I always wonder why I even built it... 
  • RidelynnRidelynn Member EpicPosts: 7,143
    The (only) card will be available on August 2nd in the US and Europe for $1,200, with an Asia release forthcoming.

    I wonder if they will have wide availability like they have with the 1080.

    Also, only FE versions. I guess that is typical for the Titans though.

  • RidelynnRidelynn Member EpicPosts: 7,143
    Gorwe said:
    Really, what's the point of these...?

    You can just get 2x r9 390 or r9 480 and be WAY more than set up to play most games on 60 fps 1080p. And that would cost you around $600 tops.

    ...who's stupid here?

    (oh right, I forgot, you need these to play with 16x SuperSampling AA on an UHD TV...smh-economics should REALLY become a mandatoy subject in schools!)
    This isn't really meant for you to go out and buy.

    This serves three purposes:

    1) It lets nVidia say they have the fastest card, and it's this fast. That's a big marketing point, and it's free advertising for the brand even if they sell 0 of these cards.

    2) It's also for the investors. They see things like this, the nVidia stock price will move (which direction is anyone's guess, but nVidia would obviously like it to be up).

    3) Those very very few select people who have the money to burn and want to chase benchmarks. This is analogous to the car people who buy Ferrarris and Lamborghinis. There aren't many of them, but us mere mortals all turn our heads when we see one on the road.
  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    seems like most of the cards of this generation will be announced within the same year!

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • donger56donger56 Member RarePosts: 443
    That's cool and all but until I see some games that can actually use all this new hardware I'll probably stick with my 750ti. Many times I have thought about upgrading but I never seem to be able to find a game that is worth the time or the money any more. Seems dumb to go out and buy a new PC that costs over 2k just to play the same crappy games in 4k. 
  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 20,627
    SEANMCAD said:
    seems like most of the cards of this generation will be announced within the same year!
    And which generation would you be referring to?
    Fedora - A modern, free, and open source Operating System. https://getfedora.org/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Torval said:
    SEANMCAD said:
    seems like most of the cards of this generation will be announced within the same year!
    And which generation would you be referring to?
    I am sorry maybe i misunderstand I thought you were up on these things maybe I am not clear on why you would ask such a question. Something about your question makes me nervous like your up to something I am just not sure what.

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 22,642
    I really dislike the name.  Giving a new card the same name as an old card is deceptive.  What's going to happen is that the new card will paper launch on August 2, people will see a Titan X in stock, and buy it not realizing that it's an old, overpriced Maxwell card.  And that's intentional on Nvidia's part.

    Apparently Nvidia claims it has 12 billion transistors, while GP100 has 15.3 billion transistors.  So they're not the same chip.  Which means this one is really weird.  Of course, for the new Titan X to have GDDR5X while GP100 has HBM2 would also be very strange if they were the same chip, as that's a ton of die space for completely independent memory controllers.

    In the past, Nvidia and AMD have generally used the same chip to be their top end graphics and compute chip.  GP100 has the fixed-function graphics hardware, so I figured they'd do that again, as that's purely wasted silicon in a compute chip.  Apparently they won't.  Sometimes that dual-purpose chip has gone heavier on compute (Nvidia Fermi GF100/GF110, AMD Hawaii) and sometimes been a mostly graphics part with a little bit of compute added (AMD Cypress and Cayman, Nvidia GK110 and GM200).  But it looks like this time, they're making two huge chips:  one pure graphics chip and one compute-heavy chip.

    My guess is that Nvidia got GP100 back, decided it was broken enough to be unsuitable for a high end graphics chip, and so they then decided to make GP102, which "fixed" the problems by taking a bunch of compute stuff out.  That's fine for graphics, but obviously not fine for Tesla cards, which have to go with GP100 whether it's broken or not.

    This seems to be the season for paper launches, with still nothing in stock at MSRP, whether from Nvidia or AMD.  Such a huge chip on such a new process node is sure to have problematic yields, though $1200 per chip can handle some yield problems and still be profitable.  But I'd still bet on a paper launch.

    With the GTX 1080, I said AMD could easily beat it just buy scaling up die size and power consumption.  Nvidia did exactly that to create the new Titan X, and it's not at all clear whether AMD will be able to beat that by scaling up.  And even if they can, it's not at all clear that they will, as AMD usually doesn't go for huge dies.  Fiji was an exception, as it launched about 3 1/2 years after their first cards on the same process node, simply because there wasn't another process node ready to move to.

    If you want the top end 14/16 nm card for gaming, this is it, or at least pretty close to it.  It's probably a salvage part, and they'll likely later launch a fully functional part that is faster.  But that's not going to be a huge jump in performance.

    But $1200?  Even if AMD cedes the $1200 consumer graphics card market to Nvidia entirely, is that really a large enough market to justify making a huge, low volume chip for it?  Remember, they're not sharing it with Tesla cards this time, though there will presumably be Quadro cards on the same chip.

    It's long been believed in some quarters that huge chips like this aren't primarily real products that they expect a lot of real customers to buy.  Rather, they're halo products, with the intention that gamers read reviews and see that Nvidia has the fastest card, but $1200 is out of their price range.  But they conclude that Nvidia must be better because Nvidia has the fastest top end card, and they are willing to spend $200, so they go buy whatever Nvidia card they can find for $200, and overpay for something stupid.  I'm not sure how common that effect is, but Nvidia sure acts like they believe it's real, and ATI used to do so, too.
  • HellidolHellidol Member UncommonPosts: 476
    I might buy this, is it over priced a little, yes. 

    image
  • HrimnirHrimnir Member RarePosts: 2,415
    Seriously quiz, all of that?  You need to take the tinfoil hat off man.  I think it's painfully obvious that this is just a full size die version of the same basic chip as the 1080.  It's basically the Titan Black /980Ti version of pascal.

    GTX 1080 is a roughly 300mm2 chip, this is probably roughly 600mm2 with the exact same overall architecture as GP104

    "The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."

    - Friedrich Nietzsche

  • GladDogGladDog Member RarePosts: 1,073
    If I had enough money to easily buy one of these, I would not.  I am sure a pair of 1070s in SLI or a pair if RX-490s (when they release) in Crossfire will be faster for considerably less.

    No matter how wealthy I was, dropping $1200 on a card that will be 'third fastest' in less than two years makes absolutely no sense.


    The world is going to the dogs, which is just how I planned it!


  • psychosiz1psychosiz1 Member UncommonPosts: 196
    May I ask will this game card be able to handle my gaming collection located below?

    http://www.kidsmmorpg.com/

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 22,642
    Hrimnir said:
    Seriously quiz, all of that?  You need to take the tinfoil hat off man.  I think it's painfully obvious that this is just a full size die version of the same basic chip as the 1080.  It's basically the Titan Black /980Ti version of pascal.

    GTX 1080 is a roughly 300mm2 chip, this is probably roughly 600mm2 with the exact same overall architecture as GP104
    Well then, what is the Tesla P100?  Nvidia says the new Titan X is has a very different number of transistors, so it can't be the same chip.  And that's something that neither Nvidia nor AMD has done in the past.

    The Tesla C870 used the same chip as the GeForce 8800 GTX.
    The Tesla C1060 used the same chip as the GeForce GTX 280.
    The Tesla M2070 used the same chip as the GeForce GTX 480.
    The Tesla M2090 used the same chip as the GeForce GTX 580.
    The Tesla K10 used the same chip as the GeForce GTX 680.
    The Tesla K40 used the same chip as the GeForce GTX 780 Ti.
    The Tesla M6 used the same chip as the GeForce GTX 980.
    The Tesla M40 used the same chip as the GeForce GTX Titan X.
    The FireStream 9170 used the same chip as the Radeon HD 3870.
    The FireStream 9270 used the same chip as the Radeon HD 4870.
    The FireStream 9370 used the same chip as the Radeon HD 5870.
    The FirePro S9050 used the same chip as the Radeon HD 7970.
    The FirePro S9150 used the same chip as the Radeon R9 290X.
    The FirePro S9300 X2 used the same chip as the Radeon R9 Fury X.

    There is one oddball exception, for the Tesla K80, which used a slightly different chip from the Tesla K40, which reduced the number of compute units, reduced the clock speed, doubled the register file size per compute unit, stuck two of them on a board--and didn't launch until Nvidia had otherwise moved on to Maxwell.

    But here, it looks like Nvidia is making a high end graphics chip that won't be used for compute, and a separate high end compute chip that won't be used for graphics, and at about the same time.  Unlike with the Tesla K80, in this case, the huge compute chip and the slightly less huge graphics chip are of very different architectures.

    Now, there's nothing unethical or illegal about doing this.  It's kind of like how Intel could create a completely custom die for the Xeon E3 rather than just reusing one from laptop and desktop quad cores.  Or they could create a completely new chip for their desktop-E series rather than just using one that is also there for Xeon E5.  But they don't, as it's too expensive to design and manufacture for too little to gain.

    Nvidia apparently decided that they would eat that cost and make separate chips.  Again, there's nothing illegal or unethical about this, but in the past, they've always shied away from it due to the cost.
  • Mtibbs1989Mtibbs1989 Member UncommonPosts: 3,161
    edited July 2016
    Gorwe said:
    Really, what's the point of these...?

    You can just get 2x r9 390 or r9 480 and be WAY more than set up to play most games on 60 fps 1080p. And that would cost you around $600 tops.

    ...who's stupid here?

    (oh right, I forgot, you need these to play with 16x SuperSampling AA on an UHD TV...smh-economics should REALLY become a mandatoy subject in schools!)
    The ability to utilize 1440p+ and/or 144hz + monitors. Not to mention more horse power means better 4k performance.

    [mod edit]
    Post edited by Vaross on

    image

    Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.
  • RidelynnRidelynn Member EpicPosts: 7,143
    I agree that something doesn't quite pass the smell test.

    This doesn't follow the pattern (or as some people like to call them, statistics). It seems a very high cost effort to introduce a card that may sell in the single-digit thousands. Of course, no one is sharing actual sales numbers, but given that no Titan model at all even pops up on the Steam Hardware survey, it isn't that big.

    But, the x80Ti models do show up - the 980Ti is at around 1%, and the 780Ti still registers at 0.25%

    My guess - HBM2 is not looking promising, and/or GP100 is just very borked (which is what Quiz suspects), and/or (and this one is a long shot) yields/production/whatever of GP104 are just so bad they needed to introduce these now to take the pressure off that inventory. - those are my guesses. It takes longer than a few months to spin up a new die, so for the GP102 to be out on a card (even a card that will be, by all indications, extremely low volume), this had to start months ago.

    Any which way, it means that a GP100 based Titan/1080Ti wasn't going to work out in time to make this generation, or (and I doubt this) this was nVidia's master plan all along. Now, Titan's don't move a lot of cards, but the high end TI does move some, and if they share the same die, then you don't get one without the other. And if you aren't quite sure how your yields are going to be yet - release the most constraining part first at a prohibitive cost, and see what happens...

  • cheyanecheyane Member LegendaryPosts: 7,536
    I have a Nvidia 770 GTX I doubt I can justify paying so much for a card. This is out of my league. For the time being although by card is considered old and I got it last year I hope to be able to use it for another couple of years I hope.
    Chamber of Chains
Sign In or Register to comment.