Originally Posted by Majin SSJ Eric
You have to stop looking at it like that. The only reason a 780Ti (which is essentially a higher clocked Titan) would "top a Titan's performance" is not because it is actually a better card. It will just come at a higher stock clock speed so at stock it will be faster than a Titan. But once OC'd there shouldn't really be any difference at all (although less memory may actually help it some). This same argument comes up in the 290X thread where apparently people act as though stock performance determines which card is better. That was stupid last year too when Nvidia supposedly won the "performance crown" with the 680 over the 7970 simply because they instituted a silly boost clocking scheme that auto-OC'd it at stock and gave it superior review benchmarks...
The mainstream tech media generally doesn't care about overclocking potential because the majority of the market doesnt care either. Its so much easier to say stock card A is better than stock card B, look at these graphs for proof. Theres still a huge number of people buying these cards that just want to throw them in their pc and play games, without worrying about voltages, memory clocks, and temperatures.
Now on the Overclock.net side, we have the population of people who care about what card is best overclocked. But the truth is, their are too many variables to definitively say "overclocked card A is better than overclocked card B". The silicon lottery, cooling required, stability, practicality. All these things are factors. We can get a general Idea that card A > card B, but its still tough to quantify.
And for my opinion, the 780ti will be faster out of the box than a titan because of higher clocks, but it won't have as many cores and will still fall short under heavily overclocked scenarios.