Nvidia GeForce Titan Launches February 18th, 2013: Loses to GTX 690, AMD HD 7990

Preliminary results show that in 3DMark Fire Strike (Extreme), GTX Titan scores 4870. According to our own testing, this would put the part some 500 points (10%) behind two GeForce GTX 680s in SLI mode. Given that a single GTX 680 achieves around 3000 points, almost 1900 points fewer than GTX Titan. Bear in mind this is still not enough to beat a single GeForce GTX 690.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
NOOBKILLA1898d ago (Edited 1898d ago )

I think I'm going to get this card. I know a lot of people think it's overkill, but I don't agree. Now if you are gaming on ultra settings with one 1080p monitor then it would absolutely be overkill. However, they're people out there that game like me. I am running 3 27" monitors at 5760x1200 with 2 GTX 560 Ti's (2GB) SLI. It is difficult for me to run the newer games on ultra with high framerates. Two GTX 680s SLI wouldn't provide the bandwidth for multi-monitor gaming and 6GB of memory for super hd texture mods I both desire. I'm super excited for the Titan.

CyrusLemont1898d ago

3 screens, say no more. I'd get two of these bad boys in sli to get high fps and high settings at that resolution. If you have the cash of course.

FlyingFoxy1897d ago (Edited 1897d ago )

Are you serious? a high end card is NOT overkill for 1080P. But i won't call this a high end card, even though it can be classed as such.. it's just a grossly overpriced rip off before the 700 series.

The only slight brightside to this card is not getting any micro stutter because it's a single card.

But if you want to keep 60+fps at 1080P you always need a high end card, which is why i'll be getting a GTX 780 or even 790 (if needed). Keeping high framerates for me is essential, and for that it is not overkill in the least if you want ultra smooth gameplay.

jeffgoldwin1897d ago (Edited 1897d ago )

um a 670 is an overkill for single monitor 1080p. so ya....

most of games I play on ultra are at 100-120 fps with my 670. maybe if yur idk skyrim with 70-100 mods I suppose it would max out or using 120 mhz (which theres like only 2 models that do that and none in higher rez than 1080p).

so from personally using 670, not just believing in hype, yes beyond that is an overkill 1080p for current games. in 3-4 years, maybe not, but all these cards will be like $150 at that time.

deadfrag1898d ago (Edited 1898d ago )

I have just one 42"screen running at 1080p and im getting this card!Why the hell People keep saying is overkill at 1080p?Its a card for 4 years at least!

FlyingFoxy1897d ago (Edited 1897d ago )

Have to agree with you, don't listen to people that say a high end card for some games or even a dual card is overkill for 1080P.

But the part i don't agree with is getting this card, it is honestly a rip off card like the Mars cards that have been released in the past. it's really stop-gap cash grab and nothing more. In June the 700 series will come out and obliterate this card completely and be a LOT cheaper. I know people can say you can wait forever, but this card really is a waste in this particular situation.

I might be getting the GTX 780 if anything worthwhile is coming out like the Source 2 engine or something, or Doom 4 even.

But as always i'll be gaming on my newer 1080p 120hz screen purely for high framerates and smooth gameplay, people who have 3 screens need to get dual cards just to get 30fps which imo is terrible.. won't see me touching that resolution with a barge pole for such terrible framerates.

NOOBKILLA1897d ago

I doubt the 780 will be 10% less than a pair of 680s in SLI like the Titan. Remember the 700 series is just a refresh. It won't be based on Maxwell. Besides, once the 700s come out I could buy another Titan for SLI and that would blow away the 700s.

xPhearR3dx1897d ago

Same here (42" Screen), but $1,000? Yeah, I'll stick to my 660 Ti.

SnakeCQC1897d ago

isnt it best to spend and 300 pounds on a 670/ 7950 etc and upgrade to get newer tech every 2 years or so

akaakaaka1897d ago

if im a pc gamer i will not invest in anything until after feb. 20 and you know why..

-MD-1897d ago

Because of consoles lol? Nothing in the upcoming consoles will even come close to something like this.

xPhearR3dx1897d ago

Because of Sony? Lmfao, please. Don't make me laugh.

pennywhyz1897d ago

what's feb 20 another outdated console for $500. Heh

Dasteru1897d ago

Unless you intend to pay $2k+ for next gen consoles, don't expect them to be using anywhere near this GPU.

The rumored GPU in the PS4 is an AMD R10xx @800mhz with 2GB memory and 1.8Tflops of overall performance.

Basically a heavily downclocked HD6950 which is from 2010.

The Titan is nearly as powerful as a GTX690 which has 5.62Tflops of performance.

And as it is a single chip GPU, you can combine up to 4 of them in quad sli.

5.62 -10% = 5.05

Most Nvidia cards get around an 80% power increase for each extra card in sli so.

5.05 + 12.12 = 17.17Tflops with 24GB VRam vs 1.8 Tflops & 2GB VRam.

The PS4 and Nextbox will be lucky to be 1/10th as powerful as a current top end PC.

And for $400 what would you expect.

4 Titans at launch will be around $2800 just for the GPUs

Midane1897d ago

Thanks for the heads-up. I'm a console gamer (go ahead, vote me down) and its always cool to learn something new. Its amazing where PC gaming has gone with all the great hardware. To bad its a pricy hobby. Who wouldnt want to have such beasts under the hood?! The question is: Does someone really need 4 of those? Does someone need even 2? Which are the games those cards will run in the end?! I dont want to be a hater, but all that PC gamers got were ports from current-gen consoles. Games like Far Cry 3 and Crysis 3 show that the current-gen consoles are getting to old. I will be first in line to invest $2K+ in a gaming PC once game developers start making games that will benefit from the raw hardware power.

SOM3ROiD1897d ago

$2800 for the cards, but still downloads cracked games from torrent sites.

Eyesoftheraven1897d ago (Edited 1897d ago )


That's all great, but the reason consoles can stand a chance is due to optimization——it can't be stressed enough. Even if PS4 comes equipped with a mobile 7850 or 7950 equivalent, that's still a big improvement over the PS3's GPU and with years of optimizations and shortcuts, will be able to render amazing looking games. PC gaming is only ever superior through sheer brute force, not necessarily clever programming and thorough optimization. Why do you think Crysis 1 still looks amazing, but couldn't run on very high with 60fps on the king GPUs in SLI at the time? Because they couldn't (given development cost and time limits) optimize such high fidelity graphics for each and every configuration available to PCs.

So what's next for PC gaming then if next gen consoles are right behind the top tier PCs? Toward the end of the next, 8th generation cycle, enthusiast PCs will again be much faster than the consoles and through brute force we will be playing 8th generation console multiplatform games in 4k @ 60 - 120fps while consoles only do 1080p @ 30 - 60fps.

Hopefully we will also see PS3 emulation. God I would love to play Metal Gear Solid 4 & Uncharted Series & God of War series in native 1080p/60fps with proper anti-aliasing.

Dasteru1897d ago (Edited 1897d ago )


Don't worry lol i'm not going to vote you down.

I have a PS3/360 & Wii also and enjoy them all for what they are.

Just stating that from a purely power standpoint they don't compare.

As for the 4 Titans, no you do not "need" them at all. Unless you want to play things completely maxed out at 2560x1600 with 32x aa and 100+ fps lol.

99% of PC games right now wouldn't even make full use of 1 of them let alone 4.

I payed a little over $2k when i built my rig about 3 years ago and it is still able to play anything at 1920x1080 with 8x aa at 45+fps, with the exception of the first crysis which gets between 25-30fps maxed out.

That is mostly due to how badly coded it was though.

Using a single stock GTX470.


True optimization does help but not nearly as much as some people may think. You can maybe get an extra 30% power out of equal hardware through optimization.

The reason the PC version of Crysis didn't run that well was because of some very BAD coding.

At 1920x1080 all settings maxed with 8x aa my system runs Crysis at an average 25fps.

I run FC3 at 1920x1080 with 16x AA all settings maxed, DirectX 11, (Crysis used 9), 16x AF and 8x Supersampling and still get a steady 45fps.

The console version was properly optimized and coded plus it was actually remade on Cryengine 3, not 2 like the PC version was. Cryengine 3 is basically Cryengine 2 light, it was heavily stripped down for console compatibility.

Watch that and you will see the difference.

juandren1897d ago

In the console channel I got like 50 disagrees for saying how badly coded Crysis was. Glad you people actually understand

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1897d ago
SnakeCQC1897d ago

console games are way more heavily optimised and get support for much longer. Can anyone really say the uncharted series god of war series and heavy rain look bad?

Dasteru1897d ago

PC games may loose developer support alot sooner than console games but it has the mod community to make up for it.

See something in a PC game you don't like or just want to be better/different? fix it. No need to wait on the developers to release a patch 6 months later. want more content? add it. No paying extra for DLC.

akaakaaka1897d ago (Edited 1897d ago )

why the hate? I'm as a smart gamer saying just wait few days before jumping into it.. nothing wrong with that and the fellow comment explain why.
well go ahead buy it and when PS4 proves you are wrong you can return it anyways.. and make a better investment and it does not mean into the PS4, i mean't maybe and i'm sure a better card will come with or soon after the PS4 is launch but I don't believe this will be good enough to go vs the PS4.. beause of optimization and etc..

plus if the next xbox and PS4 are using ADM I bet most games will run better on a ADM card, just saying.. use logic..

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1897d ago
jozzah1897d ago

So if it's worse than 690 and the 700 series is coming out later this year, what's the point of the card?

Dasteru1897d ago

The Titan is a single GPU PCB, the 690 is a dual.

It really should be getting compared to the 680 which according to this article is only 10% behind a pair of in sli.

The Titan is currently by far the most powerful single chip GPU.

jozzah1897d ago

But if the 780 ends up being better than the titan, it seems like it would be a wasted card. But I get what you mean though.

SOM3ROiD1897d ago

jebeni nolajferi, koji ste vi debili ocam'..

Show all comments (29)