Originally Posted by Hukkel
Originally Posted by Alatar
People bought Titans back when they were new because they had absolutely no competition what so ever.
The 295X2 gets handily beaten (if you OC GPUs) by cheaper dual card setups... That's the issue.
That is not really true. A Titan is equal to two GTX670s in gaming power. There were the GTX680s to SLI, there was a GTX690 and you could buy THREE HD7970s back then for the price of a Titan and they would walk all over it.
Hukkel, a Titan is not as fast in gaming as two 670's, the 690 is. now onto the point, a Titan is slower than two 660's, despite having higher overall specs. and way to point out the continuous hypocrisy of some people btw. so now 295X2 is bad because it can be matched by cheaper dual gpu setups. same went for 690, it was even bigger disparity for the mighty Titan. it was fine then though to the detractors of this card (surprised?). even last week so many people going "ah well Titan Z is for da science", "oh, it's for the SFF because everyone doesn't have room for two separate cards". card isn't viable in either situation. it's a consumer product with geforce branding, geforce drivers, according to nvidia themselves it's a "gaming beast" for people who want "a supercomputer (lol) under their table" at a workstation price. but this 295X2 is an offense to the wallet of multiple $1K gpu owners.anyway, I thought Titan was "worth it" because it was faster than every other single
gpu at the time regardless of cheaper, faster dual gpu setups available that took up more space. then again, I also thought it was a magic halo card series separate in placement and comparison with normal gaming cards. when it comes time to throw poo on AMD I guess all that goes out the window on ocn.
Originally Posted by bencher
So that makes a gpu worth $1000?
yes, because the Titan didn't get beaten by cheaper dual gpu setups even without overclocking them. absolutely no competition what so ever....oh wait.....