TGBuzz: Almost every major hardware review site has put up their benchmarks for the GTX Titan and one common trend among all of them is that in terms of FPS, the Titan is not as good as the GTX 690.
Not from the benchmarks I have seen.. the 690 outperforms the Titan in games.
This is quite a surprise for me reading your comment. I thought Titan is superior to GTX690 from features, specs and video reviews I've seen :O
AMD HD7970 GHZ Edition Crossfire set-up for $800, $200 cheaper than a GTX690 or Titan but WAY MORE POWER!!! Now if you SLI the GTX690 or Titan your looking at $2000 and about 20 frames on average higher than a HD7970 CFX Set-up. Sure 20 frames is a lot but a 20 frame gain for $1200 more!! Sorry I'm just not feeling the Nvidia Hype on the Titan when there is a Cheaper and Better Solution out there! Nvidia has 3 GPU solutions all at the same price point (GTX 680 SLI, Titan, GTX690 = $1000) and they all get beat by a cheaper ($800) HD7970 GHZ CFX set-up the majority of the time.
Yes there is a reason to get a GTX TITAN instead of a GTX690. Mostly because the GTX690 needs SLI profiles to work properly and the TITAN doesnt. I've had SLI four times and each time I went back to a single graphics card because SLI can be a pain in the rear to get working properly.
Yes but even in non-SLI, and only in a single card setup the 690 still always beats the Titan. And unless you have $2000 then you can't actually setup SLI on either, so the majority of people are looking at them for a single card setup, and in that case the 690 does win.
The GTX690 is two GPU's on one PCB and with one GTX690 it requires an SLI profile. Was ity really that hard to understand what I said? If a game doesnt have an SLI profile I guarantee that the GTX Titan will be a lot faster than the GTX690 because you are only using one of the GPU's in the GTX690.
If you look at the list of games that support SLI, it is 14 pages long, there are very few instances where the 690 wouldn't work in SLI mode so it is sort of mute point.
^Moot. (Sorry not trying to be a grammar Nazi) It is true, a lot of games support SLI. But the biggest problem, is release date for that support. Depending on the developer and how hard Nvidia is working, new titles with SLI profiles can either come out before launch, or long after launch. It's a toss up. It's a gamble. It's even luck. And there's still the inherent issue of Microstutter. Some people will notice it, others won't. But it's there in the research. Super fast Single GPU > Two GPU's doing AFR. At least when it comes to the best "experience"
And if you look at the list of titles that have low to negative sli scaling you would realise that it is a fair point to make.
I have a GTX 680, I was thinking of one day getting an even better card and using the 680 as the secondary one.
just get another 680 and run them in sli, since you already have one it will cost you half the price. then you could use the other half to start saving towards the 790.
My situation is like an ultimate fantasy where I'd be able to afford like the single most badass card and make the 680 the PhysX one or something.
Just wait for the maxwell cards (2014)
Benchmarks have shown though the Titan is more suited to triple monitor gaming because of the wide memory bandwidth and the massive 6GB of VRAM. But on a single display, the 690 will outperform it. The other advantage for the Titan is the acoustics since it is quieter even than a GTX680. And of course, being a single GPU, it will work 100% of the time. Although SLI profiles have been better, it is still not perfect. Even during the Crysis 3 beta, people had SLI issues. If I had to choose I would go for the Titan. Although it should have been priced ~$750-$800. The writer of this article clearly hasn't done his homework though and misses the point about having a super fast single GPU > two slower GPUs in SLI. It's NOT just about average frame rates. Before going to my GTX 680, I dabbled with 2 6950's in crossfire. While the average frames were higher than my old GTX 580, it was a stuttering mess. Then I sold those off and got my GTX 680 and have been happy since. There's a lot of considerations. The Titan will be fit for some builds while a 690 is for others.
There's a new "bench" than the typical avg. fps and min. fps.. something called "Frame Rating" I believe.. I think it dabbles with microstutters as well. (It's proven already) -OCN lurker
glad to see somebody knows what they're talking about around here.
No reason to get either. They are holding us to ransom (so are AMD) so stop buying their old tech crap and force the market to move on!! GTX780 by end of year (though that too will not be amazing) then Maxwell. Anyone who buys a Titan is a mug. It's not even that good.
Titan will eat a ps4 and then shit it out.Its like comparing a S500 Benz to a honda accord.You get what you pay for.Its no secret.
If you have a GTX 690 like me, jsut wait for the official 700-series, don't buy a Titan. According to many benchmarks, the GTX 690 is actually performing better in some games than the Titan.
Yeah the Titan is probably one of the strangest GPU releases. It's not the successor to the 600 series and is weird releasing at that enormous price tag. It really didn't have to enter the consumer market. If it did, they should have made it a 780, and release it for $500 next year.
most people would be insanely happy with a 670(a 680 with a few less cuda cores which means like 5 less fps)
the GTX Titans are ideal for performance gaming in a HTPC form factor. Single GPU that runs cooler & quieter than the 690.
I'd say the GTX 690 has more advantages, including simply performing better in most situations. They key things that are in favor of the TITAN card are not needing an SLI profile and having lots of VRAM. I personally took an alternative to either, two GTX 670 4GB cards in SLI. I've been very satisfied with my setup. I've never had so much power to spare. The only recent issue I've had has been with Tomb Raider, which seems to crash constantly with tessellation enabled. I'm hoping to get a driver update to fix this very soon.
Me too,on my 680, but with tessellation off its fine.
I just got yet another crash for unknown reasons. I've been having a rough time with this game so far. I'll have to check to forums to see what's causing these problems. On the upside, I realized that the TressFX "next gen hair" actually works with my cards, although this feature seems quite demanding. I guess I assumed that I wouldn't be permitted to enable it because I have Nvidia cards. I had a GTX 460 and then upgraded to 6950 cards in CF, and some of the special options disappeared in the settings for Just Cause 2. If I can use these TressFX features, even if they are more demanding for Nvidia cards, that's great.
@AKS I've turned off TressFX, Tessellation & the other one which caused crashes is maximum full screen. Just use the normal full screen with the other two settings I've mentioned off & hopefully you'll be fine. TressFX is fine until Lara starts to talk with other characters then it looks daft as her hair has the TressFX & the others hasn't. It's a massive hit on FPS for a bit of blowing hair, not worth it.
No reason, just wait and get next gen console
Why wait for Next Gen when i can play Next Gen TODAY!! besides console games are boring to me. I prefer the PC Experience!!!
Power, heat, noise, better overclocking, and it doesn't push hot air in to your case. Plus it's MUCH letter at compute applications. Simple as that.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.