Tuesday, March 10th 2015
First Alleged GTX TITAN-X Benchmarks Surface
Here are some of the first purported benchmarks of NVIDIA's upcoming flagship graphics card, the GeForce GTX TITAN-X. Someone with access the four of these cards installed them on a system driven by a Core i7-5960X eight-core processor, and compared its single-GPU and 4-way SLI performance on 3DMark 11, with its "extreme" (X) preset. The card scored X7994 points going solo - comparable to Radeon R9 290X 2-way CrossFire, and a single GeForce GTX TITAN-Z. With four of these cards in play, you get X24064 points. Sadly, there's nothing you can compare that score with.
NVIDIA unveiled the GeForce GTX TITAN-X at the Game Developers Conference (GDC) 2015. It was just that - an unveiling, with no specs, performance numbers, or launch date announced. The card is rumored to be based on the GM200 silicon - NVIDIA's largest based on the "Maxwell" architecture - featuring 3072 CUDA cores, 192 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and a 384-bit wide GDDR5 memory interface, holding 12 GB of memory. The benchmark screenshots reveal core clock speeds to be around 1.00 GHz, and the memory clock at 7.00 GHz.
Source:
VideoCardz
NVIDIA unveiled the GeForce GTX TITAN-X at the Game Developers Conference (GDC) 2015. It was just that - an unveiling, with no specs, performance numbers, or launch date announced. The card is rumored to be based on the GM200 silicon - NVIDIA's largest based on the "Maxwell" architecture - featuring 3072 CUDA cores, 192 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and a 384-bit wide GDDR5 memory interface, holding 12 GB of memory. The benchmark screenshots reveal core clock speeds to be around 1.00 GHz, and the memory clock at 7.00 GHz.
92 Comments on First Alleged GTX TITAN-X Benchmarks Surface
And NVIDIA or AMD don't works for charity, they need have money.
Currently it's more like.
nVidia : "wow to expensive" , "wow scammers" , "wow no groundbreaking performance" , "wow can't 4k with 960" , "wow 2gb only" , "wow 12gb too much"
AMD : "wow no cards" , "wow shitty drivers" , "wow Mantle died" , "wow power consumption" , "wow so much heat" , "wow so much noise", "wow VRM cooling"
Both companies have released good products and shitty products. Both companies work by the same principle: MAKE. EFFING. MONEY. If they can give you something good that works in the process, that's a plus.
The idea of the post was the shit that "one side" says repeatedly about the other. That's why it's inside quotations marks. That's why I'm not a complete "moron tool" and you have some reading comprehension issues.
Love you anyway mate.
Much like you posting 8 times in a thread of 60 replies for a card you have no interest in, bombarding an Nvidia thread with AMD rhetoric.
You do realize if the roles were reversed that the AMD fanboys would be holding the mother of all tantrums over their thread being derailed.
As for those people who do not fall in the above categories, they'll wait for a 980 Ti with 6 GB of memory and at a much lower price, which might even turn out faster than titan X anyway.
Big Maxwell Gaming Flagship with 6 GB VRAM for no more than $700 and I'm on it.
Can you PM to please what is this year UEFA CL winner, and the final score? I will do a killin' !!!
Either way guys, this is just one leaked benchmark. We should all hope its true to see some seriously nice performance gains as even if you have no intentions of buying it we still love to see things go up because that means all performance of GPU's is on the rise (next generation cards). If this did turn out fake, no harm no foul and we only got more anticipation for things coming soon... Either way until these things (GTX Titan X and R9 390X) are being tested with games by more than just leaks/the parent company we have no idea where they will actually fall.
.
The rest is a rumor, how ever i do believe it be 100's$ cheaper than this Titan will be released at.
That's why I mentioned that, idc about nvidia or AMD, I just care what's the best bang for the buck and this TitanX obviously isn't... Normal geforce variant might be if the price is right.
PS
The only fanboy here is you, sometimes so much it hurts.. And you do the same in AMD threads trolling with nvidia - like that guy nvidia pr Rollo something.. Just saying,
btw here is one with 4x 390X @ Firestrike Extreme... Just for the sake of it.
www.eteknix.com/amd-r9-390x-benchmarks-surface/
Peace out.:cool:
Humansmoke sticks up for Nvidia, through logical arguments and doesn't generally resort to name calling
Xzibit does the exact same for AMD. Both Humansmoke and Xzibit could be evil and opposite twins.
These are the two who generally make opposing and logical, often referenced arguments. Neither are fanboys but both definitely lean toward a certain product defence. I'm quite sure HS would happily buy AMD and I guarantee he has in the past and I'm pretty sure Xzibit is also indifferent to purchasing either brand.
Neither are fanboys.
A fanboy resorts to petty namecalling and statements revolving around, "Brand 'X' is going to destroy brand 'Y' because brand 'Y' sux" or "Brand X rulez and brand 'Y' makes nothing but shit stuff" or "only dicks buy brand 'x'".
Fanboys dont use logic.
To be honest, Xzibit's only post in this thread thus far is not in his usual character. Shame on you dude - where's your logically pointed and well versed discussion?
Anyhoo, Let's get back to either not talking in this thread or analysing shady benchmarks (from either camp).
FTR, I wish AMD would push the 390X out faster to force NV's hand. We all know the 390X is going to be good but what we don't know is how the pricing and future stacks will work.
BTW: I was the one who first posted that supposed 390X 3DM score here....but at least I had the sense to say it was purported, not claim it as legitimate. Just as well since it was proven fake just a few posts later.
Titan-X benchmarks could be real, and if so we have something nice to look forward to though ill be waiting for the GTX 1080 (Which is what I believe the next card from them is going to be based on the Titan-X's core) and comparing it to the R9 390X.