arterius2While I agree with most of your points, one must take into consideration of the rampant amount of inflation we are experiencing nowadays, $1000 now isn't the same $1000 a decade ago. Don't believe me? Just look at property price - they are usually a good indication of inflation rate. Commodity prices have also double or tripled since then, especially in Southeast Asia where most of these components are either designed or manufactured, their worker wages has also doubled or tripled since then. So it is extremely naive to always refer back to what things used to be rather than taking into the consideration of what has changed or evolved.

For those of you who are clueless about how the economy works, view the full length of this video before commenting and you'll be a much more educated person:

Can't view the video at work but you've got a point about inflation. We have had a good bit of inflation over the last 10 years and what you could buy with $1,000 then would cost $1,250 now according to this source.....

www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm

abundantcoresActually the Titan Black has 5.1 Tflops, the 290X has more with 5.6 Tflops.

If the Titan-Z is x2 Titan Black then thats 10.2 Tflops, the 295 X2 is 11.2 Tflops.

Edit. no thats wrong, the 295 X2 is 11.5 Tflops, it as a little higher clocks to the 290X

www.tomshardware.fr/articles/radeon-r9-295x2,1-47338.html

No, those numbers are single precision powers (FP32), which all gaming cards have no troubles crunching, what you should be looking at are double precision (FP64) numbers.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Nvidia_graphics_processing_units#GeForce_700_Series
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_AMD_graphics_processing_units#Volcanic_Islands_.28Rx_200.29_Series

arterius2No, those numbers are single precision powers (FP32), which all gaming cards have no troubles crunching, what you should be looking at are double precision (FP64) numbers.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Nvidia_graphics_processing_units#GeForce_700_Series
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_AMD_graphics_processing_units#Volcanic_Islands_.28Rx_200.29_Series

So one is more powerful than the other and vice versa in a different way, what else is new?

Nvidia use the fact that its more powerful than its rival in one measure while ignoring the other to justify double the cost, ok so they are a company with fat share holders to keep happy, and who can blame them for effective marketing.

But IMO for an apparent user to use the same marketing to justify Nvidia is a slightly worrying thing, normally i would say "Well Good luck to you" but its perhaps that which is why Nvidia can get away with charging laughably idiotic money for a graphics card.

arterius2No, those numbers are single precision powers (FP32), which all gaming cards have no troubles crunching, what you should be looking at are double precision (FP64) numbers.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Nvidia_graphics_processing_units#GeForce_700_Series
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_AMD_graphics_processing_units#Volcanic_Islands_.28Rx_200.29_Series

Most people don't use DP...even on the compute side... it just isn't needed and if it is they need ECC memory which the Titan-Z doesn't have. Or the professional drivers which it also doesn't have.

The Tesla K10 is rather low on DP yet it still sold quite well in the compute world.

DP is nice to have...but it does not justify a doubling of price... I would rather have 2x 295x2 than 1 Titan-Z
Or just a buncha Teslas if I wanted a real compute card.

Oh wait... I already do...

Show off ^^^ :p

Double Precision trolling there Patriot?

arterius2While I agree with most of your points, one must take into consideration of the rampant amount of inflation we are experiencing nowadays, $1000 now isn't the same $1000 a decade ago. Don't believe me? Just look at property price - they are usually a good indication of inflation rate. Commodity prices have also double or tripled since then, especially in Southeast Asia where most of these components are either designed or manufactured, their worker wages has also doubled or tripled since then. So it is extremely naive to always refer back to what things used to be rather than taking into the consideration of what has changed or evolved.

For those of you who are clueless about how the economy works, view the full length of this video before commenting and you'll be a much more educated person:

While what you says and what you portray is somewhat true, property/shelter is true supply/demand the world is (especially Southeast Asia) is growing and upward mobility is more rampant than ever for many. But for technology that’s not the same, technology should improve while pricing is normally reduced, or at best remain similar perf/$ to have usefulness in factual economics.

I’m just saying that if computer perf/$ from the early 1980's (Macintosh was 2,500) where in play with today's performance, a enormous amount of us on this forum wouldn't have the worry of talking about this stuff as it would so exorbitantly priced that many of us couldn't afford it. Using cell phones or and least the unbelievably technology rich smartphone wouldn't be prolific, a Motorola DynaTAC was $4000. Even cars today would never be the technology wonders they are even in the budget class. This is the Bugatti Veyron of the graphics card world, it doesn't have much sensibility other than too those that can afford it.

Using the basis of rightful/viable economy commodity pricing that are the necessity that absolutely sustain one’s life (shelter, food, clothing, etc.) are different than something that's nothing more than the luxuries of technology that are marketed as the next got to have.
While there are several technologies that hold true for mankind communication/mobility are two of the strongest. (medical health is up there also) Be it stone cravings, written scrolls-books, Gutenberg press, newspapers, telephones, TV, cell phones, communication is a crucial requirement to our ability to prosper as homo-sapiens. Same with stone wheels, boats, trains, ship, aircraft, to even space. This card is does not fall into that indispensable requirement, especially when only looking at it as a gaming card.

As a card that some person in a upstart or basement might employ to find the cure for cancer... super great value. Use it to discover a way to break the bounds of Earth’s atmosphere with huge payload while very little energy super-diddly… let’s hope that what these all gets used for. The rest is clever marketing that portends value to the masses of clueless.

This delay points out that the speculation was true and Titan-Z was a heavily down-clocked variant of the Titan Black cards which took significant hits to its performance across all levels. Holding the card back and trying to refine it by boosting the core clocks and making the cooler more massive may be a bad idea because it shows people that they were about to make a huge mistake and they know the price was ridiculous. The idea of increasing the cooler to a 3 slot design will also ruin even the one area this card could have made sense in to the point that it no longer makes any sense to buy period.

Why do people buy dual GPU cards in the first place? Normally they are bought because of a lack of PCI-E's on the motherboard so they can run high gaming setups (Normally in the 2 - 4 GPU range) or in the case of the Titan's, Render houses that needed tons of ram. Setting this card up to have a standard 3 slot bracket and design will then limit that area and make it worthless at the 3k price point to buy when your already going to take up enough room as is with one Titan-Z versus just saving a grand and buying 2 Titan Blacks and getting better performance for a lower price.

As far as Compute performance goes, AMD also still has the upper hand especially in the price to performance bracket.
us.hardware.info/reviews/5231/8/nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-black-4-way-sli-review-gpgpu-benchmarks

Even now in the double Precision category, Titan black does not warrant costing the extra 500 bucks over a 290X since in most tests, its on par with Titan black. At that point, buying 2 290X's would smoke it for compute and cost about the same
us.hardware.info/reviews/5231/9/nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-black-4-way-sli-review-gpgpu-benchmarks---double-precision-fp

Titan-Z costing double a 295X2 while even lets say performing 5-10% better (Which obviously was not true since its been delayed, im saying absolute best case) would not justify double the price since you could just grab another 295X2 and be dead even on the price and nearly double the performance in all tests.

Titan-Z will not make sense in any perspective anymore and will just be more of a talking point than something to actually brag about which is sad. Nvidia should have just reduced the price to 2200 and just accepted the fact they didn't have the strongest single card on the planet, at least consumers who needed the dual slot and 12gb of ram card could have gotten a treat to have the price reduced.

I think Jen-Hsun Huang and his team may have oversold and overpriced the Titan-Z. I don't blame them for trying to milk their customers. The Titan/Titan Black/Titan-Z supply a newly created market and keep an artificially inflated cost on their gtx 770/780/780ti.

Meh, nVidia been out done by AMD due to cooler.. Cheap bastards nVidia are they should just follow AMD and put a water cooler on the thing even more so at the price it's at..

PatriotMost people don't use DP...even on the compute side... it just isn't needed and if it is they need ECC memory which the Titan-Z doesn't have. Or the professional drivers which it also doesn't have.

The Tesla K10 is rather low on DP yet it still sold quite well in the compute world.

DP is nice to have...but it does not justify a doubling of price... I would rather have 2x 295x2 than 1 Titan-Z
Or just a buncha Teslas if I wanted a real compute card.

Oh wait... I already do...

How are the Teslas performing on gaming? I see you got 4, but where are the SLI connector bands?

If you're going to spend $3000 and care about compute, you're much better off getting a workstation class card.

Prima.VeraHow are the Teslas performing on gaming? I see you got 4, but where are the SLI connector bands?

6 actually... there are a pair of k10 in the back that you can't see. And you could passthrough any of them to a VM if you wanted. K10 would be a GTX690 so quite nicely.

arterius2While I agree with most of your points, one must take into consideration of the rampant amount of inflation we are experiencing nowadays, $1000 now isn't the same $1000 a decade ago. Don't believe me? Just look at property price - they are usually a good indication of inflation rate. Commodity prices have also double or tripled since then, especially in Southeast Asia where most of these components are either designed or manufactured, their worker wages has also doubled or tripled since then. So it is extremely naive to always refer back to what things used to be rather than taking into the consideration of what has changed or evolved.

For those of you who are clueless about how the economy works, view the full length of this video before commenting and you'll be a much more educated person:

1# Stop grasping straws and bow to the king (295X2).

2# Mike Maloney is a Gold/Silver/Vault seller and will say anything for his business to grow. The guy has been going on about doomsday and the crash of the fiat currency system (the Dollar) for god knows how long (Well Since he started selling Bullion lol). As someone said on here, tech is not the same as Property prices and most other stuff. Markets are effected differently and sometimes have no link whatsoever.

3# Please no more car analogies (lol) you're killing me/everyone.

Nvidia must be smoking some serious shit, to ask 3k for a card that will under perform 2 titans @ 1k less then the Z

This has to be Nvidia's worst mistake. Sad to see dumb shit like this come from them.

Hitman_ActualNvidia must be smoking some serious shit, to ask 3k for a card that will under perform 2 titans @ 1k less then the Z

This has to be Nvidia's worst mistake. Sad to see dumb shit like this come from them.

It doesn't make any sense does it?

abundantcoresIt doesn't make any sense does it?

None what so ever.

the 690 a dual GPU that performed just a little shy of 2 way SLI 680's
was sold for 1k.

now, you buy 2 titans. 1k a piece and out perform the titan Z for 1k less.......

I'd really like Nvidia to explain their logic behind the Z price tag.

abundantcoresIt doesn't make any sense does it?

Indeed it doesn't,

Hitman_ActualNone what so ever.

the 690 a dual GPU that performed just a little shy of 2 way SLI 680's
was sold for 1k.

now, you buy 2 titans. 1k a piece and out perform the titan Z for 1k less.......

I'd really like Nvidia to explain their logic behind the Z price tag.

Might I join you in the questioning, I can't find logic behind charging this much for something that takes up 3 slots (Which in my book ruins the point of a dual GPU card) and having it severely neutered on the overclocking and base clock front to cost way more.

Asus apparently soft released it and pulled it back down fast (guessing Nvidia told them to take it down) and we got an actual look at the specs which stated it is a 705 Base clock with a boost up to 876. This points again to being so far neutered that it was going to be a poor performer and cost an arm and a leg to boot for no apparent reason. Whats going to probably happen is that they are going to change the clocks and boost them while possibly boosting the fan speeds or adjusting the cooler in some way to make up for this.

Titan never really made much sense to begin with, but Titan-Z makes no sense what so ever. Hybridizing a GTX 780ti to have a few professional software supports and 3 more gb of ram just made very little sense to begin with. The original Titan at least had the luxury of being the highest and mightiest single GPU for its time while keeping all these attributes, but its scaled off sadly with the release of 780. I think this card should be priced much lower which would be the only way for this card to actually be worth something. 3k for a sub-par dual GPU gaming card that has sub-par "Professional" use is not worth much to most people. If I really had to buy a Titan for some features while gaming, I would rather buy 4 Titan blacks than 1 of these which would save me 2k and give me significant performance beyond what Titan-Z is capable of.

Yah I agree with you Ghostryder.

I regretfully was a 690 user. Before that I was running a single 680 and thought oh wow double that on a single card. But the was not the case. Heat killed the performance.

Too much heat on a single PCB is what kills dual GPU cards. Even on water blocks the GPU's have been neutered and will never perform as well as a single GPU card of its line.

I'd rather buy 2 cards, water block them and be done with it.

If this leak posted on VideoCardz is correct then the Titan Z will only be 60% faster than a single Titan Black so 2x Titan Black will easily outperform the Titan Z. It did also mention that the cooling is good for 450 watts on the Titan Z so possibly there is some overclocking room and that might be what Nvidia is trying to do right now. We'll see.

videocardz.com/50408/nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-z-first-performance-figures-leak

Expected to launch on May 8th

I've never seen OC potential on air before. Doesn't exist with GPU's

Just thought to throw this here:
www.guru3d.com/news_story/nvidia_geforce_gtx_titan_z_performance_figures_leak.html

2 R9 295x2 used in the system to test the psu:

Hitman_ActualYah I agree with you Ghostryder.

I regretfully was a 690 user. Before that I was running a single 680 and thought oh wow double that on a single card. But the was not the case. Heat killed the performance.

Too much heat on a single PCB is what kills dual GPU cards. Even on water blocks the GPU's have been neutered and will never perform as well as a single GPU card of its line.

I'd rather buy 2 cards, water block them and be done with it.

Indeed, and part of the problems that rise up from either a center blower or a center fan causes heat to dispel into a case in a 50/50 manner (Half goes out, half goes in). The 690 was a decent card, but it suffered from low memory and the fact that like you said it was hard to OC on air and came at a performance hit compared to stock. Albeit, I like its 2 slot design better because to me, the point of a dual GPU card is to fit 2 GPU's in a smaller setup. Many boards (If not most) run up to 2 PCI-E X16 slots (Meaning support to running at 16 times) unless you spend a fortune on some of the extended boards. Having a Dual GPU card thats reference model takes up more than 2 slots for me ruins that point from any perspective I look at because then you were just better off buying the 2 cards and using both slots since one will most likely be covered by this 3 slot design.

As far as water cooling goes, I had previously 2 HD 6990's from PowerColor that I watercooled and that allowed for some excellent overclocking (Core up to 980mhz on both) while keeping temps below 75C. I bet that can be a good solution for the card to unlock some power (As that did with the 295X2), but its going to add to the price and will also still be a 3 slot design with that updated bracket (Unless its easily removable for a Dual or Single slot bracket).

64KIf this leak posted on VideoCardz is correct then the Titan Z will only be 60% faster than a single Titan Black so 2x Titan Black will easily outperform the Titan Z. It did also mention that the cooling is good for 450 watts on the Titan Z so possibly there is some overclocking room and that might be what Nvidia is trying to do right now. We'll see.

videocardz.com/50408/nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-z-first-performance-figures-leak

Expected to launch on May 8th

I saw that, I bet its going to have a higher base and boost clock after this. But the problem will be how loud and what temps it will be running at while also how far below the normal Titan Black it is will still neuter the cost if they still stick with the 3k Pricing (Heck anything above 2200 IMO).

Hitman_ActualI've never seen OC potential on air before. Doesn't exist with GPU's

Depends, but I agree with you and doubt that anything more than 50-100 mhz will be the limit of the cooler for that card off of the cards clocks.

The last problem that really kills this card to me is the fact it WONT work in a server environment. Titans/Titan Blacks were in a small case used as render houses for companies where the amount of ram mattered. This cannot and will not function properly in that environment due to the design of the Axial fan center cooler because servers generally push air one direction.

Hagedoorn, Hilbert, NVIDIA Geforce GTX TITAN Z performance figures leak, 04/30/2014, 3:08 PM.
www.guru3d.com/news_story/nvidia_geforce_gtx_titan_z_performance_figures_leak,2.html

Looking at this, 2nd graph at the bottom, graph indicates that GTX Titan-Z does 1.6x more performance (in fps) of a GTX Titan Black. This could also imply that both GPU on the GTX Titan Z don't completely scale 2 to 1 graphic card. It's less.


@ arteries,

64bit floating point precision first derivative, as mention by others, has nothing to do with gaming. The reason for this is because when frames are being rendered, the game isn't telling the GPU that it needs to render a certain, specific shade of color x on the fly at certain sections of a single frame. 64 bit floating point precision, is mainly used for CGI and rendering. There are other uses for DP. Besides ECCM and any form for Geo boosting, DP just allows your workstation to render deeper, rich colors on the fly, for individual frames faster than someone who doesn't have the DP power on their graphic card. For example, if you use 32 bpc, or bits per color on Adobe After Effects, this slows your productivity down on the rendering time because you can't process deeper colors faster on a normal card quicker (especially on an AVI extension). Toss in Raytracing, and 6GB footage of your game play, about 30 mins to an hour depending on what recording software you used, and it's going to take a lot longer to rendering the same video on a GTX 780 or 780 Ti. DP reduces the time it takes to produce frames in this scenario. This is more so if you're using Autodesk Maya or Softimage in their Particle effect and rendering section of their software. A 220 frame CGI rendering (more then 7 seconds worth of frames) of fire effects would take about 9 hours or more hours, to render on Softimage at over 30,000 particles or voxels, on the CPU alone. With DP and other stuff, the work would probably cut down significantly. Looking at roughly less than an 20 minutes.

To me, the justification for the price of a GTX Titan Z would have been meet if it had ECCM and all the trimmings like a normal workstation card. Otherwise, to me, this is nothing more than a 3-slot, paperweight of fails on NVidia's end. I'd rather spend the extra $1,000.00 for the AMD W9100 for CGI Rendering.

abundantcoresIt doesn't make any sense does it?

My theory is that NVidia felt, prior to release, that AMD was going to flop on it's rear with the AMD R9-295x like so many NVidia, polarized fan-boys were preaching and hoping. If AMD did fail at it, in theory, AMD would have a crappy Dual GPU graphic card, and the $3,000.00 justification wouldn't seem so bad on NVidia's end. If the competition couldn't deliver a functioning product, consumers would throw a fit, and they would be more willing to purchase the alternative. Look at AMD's track record with the AMD 7990 graphic card. Ya it was still the King of the Dual GPU race, but still, it came with a boat load of frame dropping issues. AMD learned their lesson. Not only did they fix their Frame Time issues with a software fix, they provided a Dual GPU card with full Hawaii Cores (actually 90% like the R9-290x) close to it's 1.0 GHz turbo at a slightly higher TDP. Since AMD didn't drop the ball, NVidia couldn't bank big revenue returns for their $3,000.00 new wonder.

@ anyone,

So in truth, your best bet is to have 2 GTX Titan Blacks or 2 GTX 780 Ti's in SLI for gaming mainly. Nothing major has changed with the GPU on the Titan Z. Titan Z is just two Titan Blacks on one PCB with lower Core boost clocks. If 2 GTX Titan Blacks in SLI have a higher Boost clock then a GTX Titan-Z, more than likely, the SLI pair will outperform the dual GPU per card setup. GTX Titan Black, GTX 780 Ti, and GTX Titan-Z all have the same 2880 Cuda Core Count. The only difference is their speed and frame buffer size. There's really no huge performance gains between the three.

Serpent of DarknessTo me, the justification for the price of a GTX Titan Z would have been meet if it had ECCM and all the trimmings like a normal workstation card. Otherwise, to me, this is nothing more than a 3-slot, paperweight of fails on NVidia's end. I'd rather spend the extra $1,000.00 for the AMD W9100 for CGI Rendering.

More like a couple hundred dollars more for a FirePro W9100.

Provantage @ $3,182
ShopBLT @ $3,252
ExcaliberPC @ $3,299

The Titan Z price is just weird but Nvidia priced the Quadro K6000 @ $5,999 currently $4,999 MSRP and dropping so $2,999 for an alternative looks cheap for team green I guess.