Overclock.net banner

[Official] NVIDIA Titan X Pascal Owners Thread

648K views 8K replies 506 participants last post by  MrTOOSHORT 
#1 ·


http://www.geforce.com/hardware/10series/titan-x-pascal

Elite members welcome 24/7.
:coolsmile


Peasants opening times 4:45pm - 5:00pm.

Peasants must remain behind barriers at all times.

DO NOT TOUCH IT. DO NOT SNEEZE EVER!. DO NOT BREATHE ON IT...

I SAID DON'T BREATHE ON IT!
:mad:


and no RGB's... don't you even think about it
oneeyedsmiley02.png
:gunner:


LEAD Technologies Inc. V1.01
 
See less See more
6
  • Rep+
Reactions: Gary2015
#4 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leyaena View Post

I'm straight up disappointed. No GP100, no HBM2 and a higher price tag that the previous TX... I'll wait for the benchmarks, but I'll probably be passing on this one. At an msrp like that, I'd expect it to be 1.5k EUR over here at the minimum.
It was something I expected to see happen this year, but not August 2nd. That was waaaaaaay sooner than I expected.

I'm more concerned with how GTX 1080 owners must be feeling right now, spending so much money on the GTX 1080 which was almost Titan X money in the first place for a midrange die, only for this monster to come along so soon after. Especially when you consider how long it was before people actually got hold of the GTX 1080 and SLI HB Bridge due to low stocks.

This is probably the biggest stab in the back I've ever seen from Nvidia. 6months later sure, but 2months? Man that's gotta hurt....
 
#5 ·
Why would any half intelligent person purchase computer components solely based on it being the best and not around what fits their needs.

If I was a 1080 owner I would care less to what new card came out so long as I was still hitting my intended frame rates based on the research I would have done before purchasing a high end component.

I don't really think 1080 owners care about new titan x release, nor should they.
 
#6 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mhill2029 View Post

It was something I expected to see happen this year, but not August 2nd. That was waaaaaaay sooner than I expected.

I'm more concerned with how GTX 1080 owners must be feeling right now, spending so much money on the GTX 1080 which was almost Titan X money in the first place for a midrange die, only for this monster to come along so soon after. Especially when you consider how long it was before people actually got hold of the GTX 1080 and SLI HB Bridge due to low stocks.

This is probably the biggest stab in the back I've ever seen from Nvidia. 6months later sure, but 2months? Man that's gotta hurt....
From the looks of it, the 1080 still has better price to performance. I've seen claims that the TX Pascal is supposed to be ~60% faster than the old TX, which puts it around the ~25-30% faster than 1080, but it almost costs 2x as much.
 
#7 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leyaena View Post

I'm straight up disappointed. No GP100, no HBM2 and a higher price tag that the previous TX... I'll wait for the benchmarks, but I'll probably be passing on this one. At an msrp like that, I'd expect it to be 1.5k EUR over here at the minimum.
I have a theory.

I'm sure I read that Nvidia pushed Volta back to 2018. So I think they're stretching Pascal out over two years. Like this.

They release flagship 1080 based on GP104 (as they have done already). But now the 1080 outperforms Titan X, so to rectify the situation they release new Titan X based on GP102 with GDDR5X memory.

NEXT YEAR, 2017: Is when they release the GP100 with HBM2 positioned above Titan X (or replacing it) and release a slightly cut down GP100 as 1080Ti. Both with performance improvements over the 2016 releases.

Just a theory.
 
#8 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lays View Post

From the looks of it, the 1080 still has better price to performance. I've seen claims that the TX Pascal is supposed to be ~60% faster than the old TX, which puts it around the ~25-30% faster than 1080, but it almost costs 2x as much.
Yes agree. For that price I can get 2x 1080 GTX. The 1080 has a better price/performance ratio. Unless you are running 4k and wanting over 60fps, a 1080 is a better bet.
 
#10 ·
#11 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zurv View Post

oh god.. i have soooo many pointless video cards now.
After i upgrade to these new titans.. i'll have 8! gtx 1080s and 7 Titan X... anyone looking to buy some cards
tongue.gif
I would if I am sure 7 of such cards would run in a single mobo having 7 PCIe slots (with watercooling the cards can be converted to single-slot)
thumb.gif
.

Anyway, in my opinion the just-announced Titan X is not the last one in the Pascal line, it has 250 W TDP and DDR5 RAM while the P100 for computing has 300 W TDP and HBM2 memory. One can thus expect a similar Titan XXL with the TDP of 300 W, HBM2 memory and with killing heart-attack price
mad.gif
.
 
#13 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mhill2029 View Post

It was something I expected to see happen this year, but not August 2nd. That was waaaaaaay sooner than I expected.

I'm more concerned with how GTX 1080 owners must be feeling right now, spending so much money on the GTX 1080 which was almost Titan X money in the first place for a midrange die, only for this monster to come along so soon after. Especially when you consider how long it was before people actually got hold of the GTX 1080 and SLI HB Bridge due to low stocks.

This is probably the biggest stab in the back I've ever seen from Nvidia. 6months later sure, but 2months? Man that's gotta hurt....
Why would they feel bad? That card is twice the price of a GTX 1080 for 30% more performance.
 
#15 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Juub View Post

Why would they feel bad? That card is twice the price of a GTX 1080 for 30% more performance.
Depends on whether one overclocks or not. I suspect that the new Titan X would be loaded, it will have the overclockability of a founder's edition card. So if you overclock you would get it quite a lot higher than that as compared to a GTX 1080. For example if you reach 2-2.1 GHz (which is very possible for a founder edtion's card), you get at least 30% on top of its initial performance. That totals to around 70% above GTX 1080.

You can say that you can overclock GTX 1080 too. But due to the high starting clocks and aggressive adaptive overclocking you don't actually net more than 10% additional performance. If all of the above are true, you can have +50-60% of greater performance as compared to GTX 1080 merely by overclocking your Titan X. This in turn would make Titan X (overclocked) the first 4K card (minimum FPS to most games maxed @ 4K > 50FPS)

Can't say I'm not excited, what I can say is that I'll probably not be able to justify that cost to me (or my wife).
 
#16 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven185 View Post

Depends on whether one overclocks or not. I suspect that the new Titan X would be loaded, it will have the overclockability of a founder's edition card. So if you overclock you would get it quite a lot higher than that as compared to a GTX 1080. For example if you reach 2-2.1 GHz (which is very possible for a founder edtion's card), you get at least 30% on top of its initial performance. That totals to around 70% above GTX 1080.

You can say that you can overclock GTX 1080 too. But due to the high starting clocks and aggressive adaptive overclocking you don't actually net more than 10% additional performance. If all of the above are true, you can have +50-60% of greater performance as compared to GTX 1080 merely by overclocking your Titan X. This in turn would make Titan X (overclocked) the first 4K card (minimum FPS to most games maxed @ 4K > 50FPS)

Can't say I'm not excited, what I can say is that I'll probably not be able to justify that cost to me (or my wife).
1417 vs 1607 base clock

So even if they both OC to 2100 on average, then the Titan would still be less than 50% faster. (1.14*1.3)
 
#17 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven185 View Post

Depends on whether one overclocks or not. I suspect that the new Titan X would be loaded, it will have the overclockability of a founder's edition card. So if you overclock you would get it quite a lot higher than that as compared to a GTX 1080. For example if you reach 2-2.1 GHz (which is very possible for a founder edtion's card), you get at least 30% on top of its initial performance. That totals to around 70% above GTX 1080.

You can say that you can overclock GTX 1080 too. But due to the high starting clocks and aggressive adaptive overclocking you don't actually net more than 10% additional performance. If all of the above are true, you can have +50-60% of greater performance as compared to GTX 1080 merely by overclocking your Titan X. This in turn would make Titan X (overclocked) the first 4K card (minimum FPS to most games maxed @ 4K > 50FPS)

Can't say I'm not excited, what I can say is that I'll probably not be able to justify that cost to me (or my wife).
Your assuming it will overclock like a 1080. Pretty big assumption. Why in the world would Nvidia neuter the Titan's performance with clock speed out of the box anyways? Doesn't even make sense for them to do that to their flagship.

Anyway these cards are priced very far apart. 700 dollars is a lot for me to spend on a GPU 1200 is unthinkable. It will be cool to see but speaking as a 1080 owner I was never going to buy it even if it launched first.
 
#18 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zurv View Post

oh pooo.. i can' t post anything in the market till i have 35 rep.. hrmm.. i wonder what is needed to setup a selling account on amazon
Don't use amazon. I've read about lots of people getting ripped off selling expensive items. Use /r/hardwareswap
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtom320 View Post

Your assuming it will overclock like a 1080. Pretty big assumption. Why in the world would Nvidia neuter the Titan's performance with clock speed out of the box anyways? Doesn't even make sense for them to do that to their flagship.
Probably to keep it at 250w. But I agree, I don't see it clocking past 2000 like the other cards. Heat and PT will be killer. The FE cooler can't even keep the smaller chips cool.
 
#19 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Juub View Post

Why would they feel bad? That card is twice the price of a GTX 1080 for 30% more performance.
If you can actually find one for that price.
 
#20 ·
20% price increase over previous gen with no actual differences over the previous gen? At least Intel added some cores when they made a totally insane price increase. But I guess that's what you can get away with when you have literally zero competition and the future of multi-GPU is grim...
 
#21 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by pewpewlazer View Post

20% price increase over previous gen with no actual differences over the previous gen? At least Intel added some cores when they made a totally insane price increase. But I guess that's what you can get away with when you have literally zero competition and the future of multi-GPU is grim...
Nvidia did the exact same thing here, they just added more cores
biggrin.gif
 
#22 ·
T
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtom320 View Post

Your assuming it will overclock like a 1080. Pretty big assumption. Why in the world would Nvidia neuter the Titan's performance with clock speed out of the box anyways? Doesn't even make sense for them to do that to their flagship.

Anyway these cards are priced very far apart. 700 dollars is a lot for me to spend on a GPU 1200 is unthinkable. It will be cool to see but speaking as a 1080 owner I was never going to buy it even if it launched first.
That's easy to keep the TDP. Titan X (the original) could easily reach the 1500 Mhz range, which very much is the range of the lower Maxwell cards...
 
#23 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derpinheimer View Post

1417 vs 1607 base clock

So even if they both OC to 2100 on average, then the Titan would still be less than 50% faster. (1.14*1.3)
If the clocks adapt less aggressively then it would 50%+ in performance difference... Also non FE edition cards (that many of the people probably have here) would probably not reach as high as Titan X (binned, handpicked cards / the ones of lesser quality would probably become the 1080 TI)....
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfedorov11 View Post

Don't use amazon. I've read about lots of people getting ripped off selling expensive items. Use /r/hardwareswap
Probably to keep it at 250w. But I agree, I don't see it clocking past 2000 like the other cards. Heat and PT will be killer. The FE cooler can't even keep the smaller chips cool.
Keep in mind that Titan X are probably binned cards (non binned would become the 1080 ti series once enough stock of them is made). Binned cards don't need as high voltage. That's why you'd get something similar with the original Titan X (often times 1500+ clocks, which is what the lower cards would get too).
 
#24 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mhill2029 View Post

It was something I expected to see happen this year, but not August 2nd. That was waaaaaaay sooner than I expected.

I'm more concerned with how GTX 1080 owners must be feeling right now, spending so much money on the GTX 1080 which was almost Titan X money in the first place for a midrange die, only for this monster to come along so soon after. Especially when you consider how long it was before people actually got hold of the GTX 1080 and SLI HB Bridge due to low stocks.

This is probably the biggest stab in the back I've ever seen from Nvidia. 6months later sure, but 2months? Man that's gotta hurt....
First off I don't consider a 400 dollar difference...almost titan money. Second i'd be happy if I bought a 1080 the the announced the new titan. the new Titan is twice the price of a 1080 and seems is going to only be about 30 percent more performance doesn't seem like enough for something that expensive. Also keep in mind this thigs 200 bucks more than the titan its replacing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by meson1 View Post

I have a theory.

I'm sure I read that Nvidia pushed Volta back to 2018. So I think they're stretching Pascal out over two years. Like this.

They release flagship 1080 based on GP104 (as they have done already). But now the 1080 outperforms Titan X, so to rectify the situation they release new Titan X based on GP102 with GDDR5X memory.

NEXT YEAR, 2017: Is when they release the GP100 with HBM2 positioned above Titan X (or replacing it) and release a slightly cut down GP100 as 1080Ti. Both with performance improvements over the 2016 releases.

Just a theory.
With the prices cards are coming out at now could you imagine how much those cards would be if what you're saying is true? If the jump in price of the new titan is any indication you're probably talking about a 2k and a 1500 dollar graphics card respectively.
 
#25 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by loki993 View Post

With the prices cards are coming out at now could you imagine how much those cards would be if what you're saying is true? If the jump in price of the new titan is any indication you're probably talking about a 2k and a 1500 dollar graphics card respectively.
I withdraw that theory now. I misunderstood what the GP100 was. GP100 is the double precision chip intended for compute markets with the Tesla line.

However, with the latest news that Nvidia have supposedly decided to bring Volta forward by putting it on 16nm, we are now looking at 2017 for GVxxx products. Pascal was only supposed to be a stop gap until Volta. It's the Volta architecture is supposed to represent a significant jump.
 
#26 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven185 View Post

Depends on whether one overclocks or not. I suspect that the new Titan X would be loaded, it will have the overclockability of a founder's edition card. So if you overclock you would get it quite a lot higher than that as compared to a GTX 1080. For example if you reach 2-2.1 GHz (which is very possible for a founder edtion's card), you get at least 30% on top of its initial performance. That totals to around 70% above GTX 1080.

You can say that you can overclock GTX 1080 too. But due to the high starting clocks and aggressive adaptive overclocking you don't actually net more than 10% additional performance. If all of the above are true, you can have +50-60% of greater performance as compared to GTX 1080 merely by overclocking your Titan X. This in turn would make Titan X (overclocked) the first 4K card (minimum FPS to most games maxed @ 4K > 50FPS)

Can't say I'm not excited, what I can say is that I'll probably not be able to justify that cost to me (or my wife).
Here are three Time Spy links, one with the card underclocked to reach the ~1670MHz that Computerbase saw as their average clock speed on the air-cooled FE after letting the card heat up, one stock and one overclocked mostly stable run.
http://www.3dmark.com/spy/80728
http://www.3dmark.com/spy/80588
http://www.3dmark.com/spy/48466

Compared to the underclocked result to try and compare it to the FE at stock on air, the score is 26% higher. Compared to the stock one, where it's already running almost 200MHz over the boost clock due to being under water, it's 15%. This is also on stock BIOS and one can expect it to go up once custom BIOS becomes available.

Yeah, the 1080 overclocks itself far beyond the boost clock, mine hovers around 1898MHz and 1911MHz stock, but the Titan would do the same thing, which cuts into the gains you would see when overclocking just the same. GM204 also reaches higher clock speeds than GM200, could very well be the same here that the Titan will fall 50-100MHz behind the 1080 when overclocked.

GTX 1080 is a 8.9TFLOPs card at 1733MHz, the Titan 11TFLOPs. That makes 24%. Let's say that the memory bandwidth brings that up to 30% at stock. Then let's also say that it overclocks a bit better, and maybe we'll have 35% at most when both are overclocked. If you think it'll be 70% you're setting yourself up for a major disappointment.
 
Top