KitGuru KitGuru.net – Tech News | Hardware News | Hardware Reviews | IOS | Mobile | Gaming | Graphics Cards
Even though Nvidia Corp.’s latest high-end graphics card costs more than its predecessors in Europe, demand for the graphics adapter is surprisingly high. According to a German retailer, customers are getting more GeForce GTX Titan X graphics cards than previous-generation products of the same class.
“The demand exceeds the available [hardware],” said a spokesperson of CaseKing.de in an interview with ComputerBase web-site. “We have already [sold] impressive numbers and we are getting new [GeForce GTX Titan X] to the warehouse.”
Mind Factory, another reseller from Germany, confirmed that sales figures of the GeForce GTX Titan X are higher than shipment figures of the original GeForce GTX Titan.
The GeForce GTX Titan X graphics card is 30 – 50 per cent faster than Nvidia GeForce GTX 980, but it costs nearly two times more than the latter. People who buy graphics cards like the GeForce GTX Titan X get it because it delivers impressive performance in ultra-high-definition resolution (e.g., 3840*2160).
Nvidia’s flagship GeForce GTX Titan X graphics processing unit features 3072 stream processors, 192 texture mapping units, 96 raster operations pipelines and 384-bit memory bus. The graphics card features 12GB of GDDR5 memory.
The official manufacturer suggested retail price (MSRP) of the GeForce GTX Titan X in the United Kingdom is £879, which is around $1300. Due to different taxes in Eurozone countries, the GeForce GTX Titan X costs starting from €1149 in Germany, €1199 in France, Spain, Holland and Belgium, €1249 in Italy and the Baltic states as well as €1269 in Finland.
Discuss on our Facebook page, HERE.
KitGuru Says: It is rather surprising that demand for the GeForce GTX Titan X exceeds supply in certain cases. On the other hand, there were reports that demand for Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 980 was so high that some retailers increased prices of such graphics cards. It will be very interesting to learn about demand for AMD’s forthcoming flagship Radeon R9 390X graphics card. The graphics solution promises to offer very high performance in 4K UHD resolution while costing “only” about $700. But will demand for it exceed that of the Titan X? Only time will tell.
You see AMD, this is what happens when you leave your competition unchecked and unchallenged for so long. Why you are waiting so long to release the 300 series is beyond me.
One can only hope it’s because they are trying to make a more competitive card this time around.
that maybe so you know, because they’ve stayed quiet for way too long now
Let’s face it a card that sells for $1000 US in the US, $1200-1300 US in Europe (when converted from pounds/Euro) and $1400-1500 Canadian is a card 99.5% of PC gamers could care less about and neither does AMD because AMD doesn’t make $999 single chip videocards.
Remember all those Titan owners that took a foot in their mouth when R9 290 launched with similar performance for just $399? It’s going to happen even sooner this time when NV releases consumer GM200 6GB and AMD launches R9 390 series around Computex (June 2015). Unless you are swimming in money where $1-2K is pocket change, it’s best to steer clear of the Titan X. The stock blower holding back overclocks isn’t helping either. You can bet MSI Lightning or EVGA Classified GM200 card will blow the Titan X away.
The titan has other more professional uses. i mean the large memory size alone especially for the software I use is favorable. considering the professional cards cost more than twice for a similar specs. And there not always as good as the Gforce cards under certain tasks requiring higher clock speeds. I can see the appeal I guess…
Ps, for professional uses AMD cards even their firepros aint always the best, driver issues and the lack of CUDA usually mean I have to go with Nvidia.
In the mean time I’ll be playing GTA V and Witcher 3 at 4K while people wait and hope for June. I think you are forgetting last time the Titan was a cut down Gk110 chip, Then Nvidia released the full Gk100 with the 780 Ti. This is the FULL fat GM200 chip with nothing to add. As for holding back overclocks My Titan X is running at 1425Mhz (42% above stock 1000Mhz and pushing Compute performance from 7 to 9 TFlops!) on the core 7800Mhz memory and Maxing out at 76C with the fan at 65% oh and 12GBs of ram. That 980 Ti by the way may very well be a cut down GM200 this time. Its fine if you see value in waiting for a better price to performance proposition. But I’m sick of people bashing anyone who has purchased a Titan X based on rumours, disinformation or a judgement call on their character as an individual.
A single Titan X won’t be fast enough for The Witcher 3 with Uber Sampling at 4K and you know it. For a lot of gamers rocking solid GPUs right now, a single Titan X isn’t an upgrade which would mean buying 2 of those. In my country that costs almost $2,500 USD. Not everyone is fortunate enough to be able to afford $2,500 on 2 GPUs just to have bragging rights for 3-4 months. You are assuming that NV will cut down GM200 but I think we’ll have fully unlocked GM200 just like we had 780Ti but with less VRAM and another respin, give it EVGA Classy or MSI Lightning treatment and I can see 1.5Ghz on air for $700-750. Also, I didn’t even touch on the R9 390 nonX. That might come in at $550 which means 2 of those should blow the Titan X away. If you can afford dual Titan Xs today, then sure it makes no sense to wait 🙂 The rest of us must wait because $2000-2500 USD for 2 cards is way too expensive.
Ya, you are right. If you are using the Titan X for computational single precision research or rendering where 12GB of VRAM comes into play, I can see how it’s actually a value purchase for you.
Ubersampling at 4k? do you know what ubersampling is? It renders the game at a higher resolution then downscales it to your resolution to make a smoother image, like Nvidias Dynamic Super Resolution. It is meant for people running 1080p and wont even be a setting in Witcher 3. Running Ubersampling on a 4k screen would be like running the game in 8k lol. Everything is smooth at 4K you don’t even need to run anti aliasing. As for a Titan X not being an upgrade, I have doubled my 4K frame rates from a highly overclocked 780 Ti which is on par with a 980 and beats a 290X so I have no idea why you keep saying you need to buy two for it to be an upgrade. If you have a single GPU and a 4K monitor this is the card to get. If you have 1080p get a GTX 970 If you have 1440P get a 980
I know what Uber Sampling is and I am pretty sure it will be a feature as it was in TW2. I disagree that anti-aliasing is not needed at 4K. Many professional sites and PC gamers online report that despite the higher resolution, you can still see shimmering and jaggies when in motion. I’ve seen benchmarks online and Titan X isn’t fast enough for modern titles to be maxed out at 4K. This was known for a long time since even 290X cross-fire or 980 SLI weren’t fast enough. If you don’t believe me, go check reviews. If you can’t max a game out at 4K, it’s better to run it maxed out at 1440p or even 1080p.
Maybe our definition of maxing out games is different.
@ 4K on a Titan X
Crysis 3 = 26 fps
Bioshock = 49 fps
Metro Redux = 36 fps
Tomb Raider = 46 fps
Sleeping Dogs = 28 fps
Battlefield 4 = 31 fps
Thief = 42 fps
Watch Dogs = 46 fps
http://www.techspot.com/review/977-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x/page3.html
I am being objective here and it’s obvious that one needs Titan X SLI overclocked to get 60 fps with max settings on modern titles today at 4K. None of those games will be as demanding as The Witcher 3 either. So no way you are playing TW3 maxed out at 4K on a Titan X at 60 fps.
For max settings yes I agree you would need two. But I have messed around with so many settings and found little to no difference in a lot of them. I personally don’t use AA at 4k because i like how crisp it looks and the pixles aren’t big enough for it to look bad. Plus you gain a huge boost in frames. I can tell you those benchmarks are the worst I have ever seen . With Bioshock I was averaging almost 60 fps on just about max settings with just my 780 ti. That battelfield 4 is way off as well. I can tell you out of those games I have run Crysis 3, Bioshock, Tomb raider, Battlefield and Sleeping dogs and have been able to keep 60 Fps with a few tweaks. Nothing set to low just shadows from ultra to high or post processing turned down and depth of field turned off since I don’t care for it anyway. Once I forgot the whole eveything on ultra mindset and used my eyes I was happy.One Titan X with AA off and a few settings tweaks even with textures still on Ultra once overclocked will do 60Fps at 4K. I disagree with you about if you cant max everything out lower resolution is better. I would take 4K High settings over 1080p ultra settings any day of the week. If you couldn’t max something at 1080p would you lower your resolution to 800 x 600? or adjust a few settings?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpmuXd52Ce0
Here is a video of one overclocked Titan X outperforming 980s in sli at 4K.Oh and Unity is broken
…then when TSMC decides to start making 16/14nm FF desktop graphics chips in a few months, Nvidia releases the true fully unlocked GM200 with like 5,000+ CUDAs on the same size die with better thermals and lower power consumption and calls it the Titan XXX and sells it for the same $1,000 then lowers the price of the now peasant Titan X to where it should be now – $699. The porn star Titan is able to do 100+ FPS in 4k in every game out. Several reports of Titan X 28nm owners jumping off cliffs and throwing their PCs off high buildings all over the world shortly after.
Why doesnt amd release a card? Im in for a high end gpu right now. Ive been waiting for 3 fkn months and they didnt release sht. I wont wait til june.
“I would take 4K High settings over 1080p ultra settings any day of the week.”
I would not. Ultra settings mean highest textures, shaders, shadow effects, lightning effects. Extra resolution on top of inferior graphics just produces sharper inferior graphics. Graphics are all about the effects and texture quality. Why do you think a game like Ryse Son of Rome on XB1 or The Order 1886 look better than Crysis 1 on the PC? You can’t add billions of pixels to game a suddenly make it look way better. Amazing graphics at lower resolution can overcome good graphics at 4K-8K. I mean the Order 1886 looks better than 95% of all PC games, no matter the resolution.
As I said in my previous posts, to get hit 60 fps consistently in modern titles at 4K, 2 Titan Xs are needed. This is a recent review which shows a 1.4Ghz overclocked Titan X can’t even manage it:
http://gamegpu.ru/test-video-cards/titan-x-v-4k-test-gpu.html
Rumors out of China have it that a 1200mhz 980Ti with 6GB of VRAM might come out at $799 or so by Computex to spoil the launch of R9 390 series by end of Q2. History repeats itself – the last Titan was a rip-off and this Titan X will follow the same path — either NV or AMD will bring a card 90-95% as fast for $200-300 less soon.