Monday, December 11th 2017

NVIDIA's Latest Titan V GPU Benchmarked, Shows Impressive Performance

NVIDIA pulled a rabbit out of its proverbial hat late last week, with the surprise announcement of the gaming-worthy Volta-based Titan V graphics card. The Titan V is another one in a flurry of Titan cards from NVIDIA as of late, and while the healthiness of NVIDIA's nomenclature scheme can be put to the sword, the Titan V's performance really can't.

In the Unigine Superposition benchmark, the $3000 Titan V managed to deliver 5,222 points in the 8K Optimized preset, and 9,431 points on the 1080p Extreme preset. Compare that to an extremely overclocked GTX 1080 Ti running at 2,581 MHz under liquid nitrogen, which hit 8,642 points in the 1080p Extreme preset, and the raw power of NVIDIA's Volta hardware is easily identified. An average 126 FPS is also delivered by the Titan V in the Unigine Heaven benchmark, at 1440p as well. Under gaming workloads, the Titan V is reported to achieve from between 26% and 87% improvements in raw performance, which isn't too shabby, now is it?

Poring through a Reddit discussion on the Titan V's prowess, the amount of benchmarks already in the wild is overwhelming, but a clear picture is easy to get: the Titan V is the world's most powerful gaming card at the moment, delivering a better experience in every setting, game, and workload (be it VR gaming or rendering) than any other GPU.

In Futuremark's VR Mark "Blue Room" benchmark, for instance, the Titan V easily delivers a score of 4,400 points - compared to the benchmark's own base premium high-end PC scores, that's a 1,428 points increase, delivering an above 90 FPS experience, something a GTX 1080 Ti wouldn't be able to achieve under the same settings. On the TimeSpy benchmark, the stock Titan V delivers 11,539 points, around 1,000 points more than the average 10,500 points a GTX 1080 Ti would achieve, paired with the same processor (there are higher 1080 Ti scores, yes; there are also lower.)
The Titan V achieves an average of 65 FPS on max settings at 1440p; an average of 157 FPS on Gears of War 4 on Ultra settings at the same resolution; 76 FPS Average on 1440p, Crazy Preset of the Ashes of The Singularity Benchmark; and a slew of other gaming results that you'd do better in poring through yourself, including Deus Ex: mankind Divided, Fallout 4, XCOM 2, and others.
We also have to remember that the Titan V can either be seen as the most expensive gaming graphics card that NVIDIA has ever sold, or as the best price/performance Volta-based computing graphics card. In general compute workloads the Titan V shines again, eking out victory after victory against NVIDIA's other gaming-capable offerings such as the GTX 1080 Ti. This is by no means an extensive coverage, but the Titan V has been benchmarked as delivering 41 seconds GPU time in the V-Ray benchmark, against the 107 seconds that a GTX 1080 Ti managed to deliver (with an equivalent CPU score). On SpecViewPerf 12.1, the Titan V delivers better performance than NVIDIA's professional Quadro P6000 (which goes for $5,000) across all workloads save one. This seems to be the best price-performance ratio for this graphics card, not gaming; so if you're looking for the best possible compute performance and the best gaming experience on the side, the Titan Volta is the only solution.
Sources: Reddit User @hellotanjent, Joker Productions YouTube, Reddit User @Nekrosmas
Add your own comment

71 Comments on NVIDIA's Latest Titan V GPU Benchmarked, Shows Impressive Performance

#26
BlueFalcon
nguyenWell Nvidia managed to cram an additional 73% more transistors into Volta than Pascal while keeping the same power envelop, if Ampere has none of the compute stuff and maintain the same transistors count we can expect the same jump as from 980ti to 1080ti (60%)
1080Ti outperforms 980Ti by a lot more than 60%. In TPU's November 24, 2017 EVGA GTX 1070 Ti FTW2 iCX 8GB Review, the 1080Ti reference card was 75% faster at 1440p (135%/77%) and 87% faster at 4K (140%/75%). You can try making an argument that a reference 980Ti hasn't aged that well (which can be seen somewhat since it now consistently loses to the Fury X on average) or argue in favor of its great overclocking headroom (980Ti gains more from overclocking than 1080Ti does). Strictly speaking from a generational performance leap, it seems unlikely that a reference $700+ GTX2080Ti projected for a 2019 release will be 75-87% faster at 1440p-4K compared to the $700 1080Ti.

More likely than not, the performance increase will be far lower and prices could be even higher due to lack of competition from AMD. Apple has shown that its loyal customers are willing to pay $1,000-1,200 USD for iPhone X. There is little reason why NV cannot price GTX2080 at $699-749 and move the GTX2080Ti to $899-999 given that Vega guzzles power and barely performs as fast as 1.5-year-old GTX1080. I expect the 2018-2019 generation to be the most expensive one as AMD's deficit on the high-end is too great to overcome, leaving NV with full power to raise prices again. We should probably expect GTX2070 ~ GTX1080Ti and GTX2080 to outperform the 1080Ti by 15-25% and the 2080Ti card to launch in 2019. This has pretty much been the way NV has operated since 2012 Kepler.
Posted on Reply
#27
Vlada011
IMPRESSIVE PERFORMANCE? SOMEONE SHOULD BEAT THIS PEOPLE WHO WRITE SUCH THINGS.
45% IMPROVEMENT FROM 1200$ TO 3000$ IMPRESIVE.
THAT'S IMPRESSIVE DONKEY EARS FOR ANYONE WHO SAY THAT.
Are you blind, are you normal at all. 45% improvement or 50% or 55% after 18 months over graphic card worth 1200$ to charge 3000$?
I don't see nothing impressive there, only diagnose.
For this price I could buy new Kawasaki 2018 multipurpose or Off road.
And next year or for 5 years no one will launch 50% better model, are you aware of that.
One word- F A I L!
I expected to NVIDIA show up with some 16GB HBM model at least 60-70% stronger than TITAN XP, to match with TITAN XP SLI and replace him with price. This, buyers should be jelous for people who resist for this and ask help from doctor.
This is school example of Asian robbery like people earn 1K dollars for 5 days.
Even with so good job you need to work like horse 15 days to pay him and you have 10 days to earn for food and everything else.

Impressive win over 2 years old model with three time more expensive graphic card. Success, pure success.
Posted on Reply
#28
GhostRyder
Meh, not a gaming card anyway but seeing what it can do with its specs is kinda disappointing. Not commenting about the price since this one is clearly not gaming oriented unlike their previous Titans. Its a good taste of whats to come but its not what was hoped for the specs, then again were talking gaming performance and not what its actually designed for.
Posted on Reply
#29
Fluffmeister
Well people wanted Titan cards to be compute cards again, now you have to pay for it... especially with what the GV100 offers. I agree the Maxwell and Pascal based Titan cards were merely overpriced consumer cards but sadly people lapped them up... nom nom nom same with the original Keplar Titan card which was soon dethroned.

Soon we will back to moaning why the GTX 1180 has poor FP64 performance.
Posted on Reply
#30
Slizzo
Vlada011IMPRESSIVE PERFORMANCE? SOMEONE SHOULD BEAT THIS PEOPLE WHO WRITE SUCH THINGS.
45% IMPROVEMENT FROM 1200$ TO 3000$ IMPRESIVE.
THAT'S IMPRESSIVE DONKEY EARS FOR ANYONE WHO SAY THAT.
Are you blind, are you normal at all. 45% improvement or 50% or 55% after 18 months over graphic card worth 1200$ to charge 3000$?
I don't see nothing impressive there, only diagnose.
For this price I could buy new Kawasaki 2018 multipurpose or Off road.
And next year or for 5 years no one will launch 50% better model, are you aware of that.
One word- F A I L!
I expected to NVIDIA show up with some 16GB HBM model at least 60-70% stronger than TITAN XP, to match with TITAN XP SLI and replace him with price. This, buyers should be jelous for people who resist for this and ask help from doctor.
This is school example of Asian robbery like people earn 1K dollars for 5 days.
Even with so good job you need to work like horse 15 days to pay him and you have 10 days to earn for food and everything else.

Impressive win over 2 years old model with three time more expensive graphic card. Success, pure success.
Titan V does not have hampered fp64 performance like previous Titans did, and also this includes the Tensor cores for deep learning.

This card is not expected to compete with any other gaming card out there, and destroys previous Titans when you include apps that take advantage of fp64 and deep learning AI.
Posted on Reply
#31
deu
ZoneDymoThe Titan Volta is not a gaming card.
It might not be a gaming card but it sure is named as if its one. If they release a card in the future for gaming with titan name they have officially no marketing department any more..
Posted on Reply
#32
bug
I'm reading these comments and in my head I'm replaying all those comments about how Polaris was a great move, because who cares about the high-end? :wtf:
Posted on Reply
#33
Vya Domus
FluffmeisterWell people wanted Titan cards to be compute cards again, now you have to pay for it... especially with what the GV100 offers. I agree the Maxwell and Pascal based Titan cards were merely overpriced consumer cards but sadly people lapped them up... nom nom nom same with the original Keplar Titan card which was soon dethroned.
Let's not fall into disillusion. Titan cards were just a vanity item for gamers with deep pockets from the beginning. The first Titan wasn't even that astounding in terms of compute , Kepler was ironically the worst architecture Nvidia ever made for that purpose. It made headlines more for it's price rather than it's usefulness.

This is the first card that they have released since Fermi that is actually meant for compute. So who exactly asked for this ? Because the average customer sure didn't , they never gave a shit about any of this.
FluffmeisterSoon we will back to moaning why the GTX 1180 has poor FP64 performance.
Literally no one will ever say that. FP64 isn't even in vogue for machine learning.

FP16 is where it's at. As you can see GV100 gets you more than 25 TFLOPS of that and those Tensor Cores run on mixed FP16 and FP32 as well.
Posted on Reply
#34
OneCool
I'm going to mine with the 4 I'm buying. :D:D :peace:
Posted on Reply
#35
ExV6k
BorisDGThe performance difference actually is not that impressive if we go back and see 980Ti vs 1080Ti. I mean here we have the full power of Volta and not some cut-down chip. When **80/**80Ti comes out the gap will be even smaller.

It's still impressive chip for scientific calculations tho.
This is a cut-down chip.
Posted on Reply
#36
Fluffmeister
Vya DomusLet's not fall into disillusion. Titan cards were just a vanity item for gamers with deep pockets from the beginning. The first Titan wasn't even that astounding in terms of compute , Kepler was ironically the worst architecture Nvidia ever made for that purpose. It made headlines more for it's price rather than it's usefulness.

This is the first card that they have released since Fermi that is actually meant for compute. So who exactly asked for this ? Because the average customer sure didn't , they never gave a shit about any of this.
I don't disagree, but it doesn't change the fact it sold just fine, much to the despair of many and to the surprise of mean old Nvidia.

Luckily the average consumer isn't forced to buy anything, I guess much to the despair of many again... but hey there is a pro market for a reason too. And some people just want GTX 1080 Ti performance 6 MONTHS earlier, and thats what Nv gave with the first Pascal Titan for example... blah blah blah.
Vya DomusLiterally no one will ever say that. FP64 isn't even in vogue for machine learning.

FP16 is where it's at. As you can see GV100 gets you more than 25 TFLOPS of that and those Tensor Cores run on mixed FP16 and FP32 as well.
You'll be surprised, but I just hate it when people say shit is "gimped" at compute and the like, it tickles my funny bone.
Posted on Reply
#37
illli
lol for $3000 that isn't impressive at all
Posted on Reply
#38
nguyen
BlueFalcon1080Ti outperforms 980Ti by a lot more than 60%. In TPU's November 24, 2017 EVGA GTX 1070 Ti FTW2 iCX 8GB Review, the 1080Ti reference card was 75% faster at 1440p (135%/77%) and 87% faster at 4K (140%/75%). You can try making an argument that a reference 980Ti hasn't aged that well (which can be seen somewhat since it now consistently loses to the Fury X on average) or argue in favor of its great overclocking headroom (980Ti gains more from overclocking than 1080Ti does). Strictly speaking from a generational performance leap, it seems unlikely that a reference $700+ GTX2080Ti projected for a 2019 release will be 75-87% faster at 1440p-4K compared to the $700 1080Ti.
heh better go watch this


or many others video that shows how 980ti oc compare to 1070 oc
New 1080ti review probably didn't have the 980ti retested and just used old value that don't include driver optimization anyway. And 980ti losing to Fury X is the furthest from truth (even beating Fury X in Wolfenstein 2).

Edit: new video show the Titan V can mine Ethereum at 77MH/s @ 220w, so this is like a do all best all card atm but only affordable to Tony Stark
Posted on Reply
#39
lexluthermiester
BorisDGIt's still impressive chip for scientific calculations tho.
That is really what the card is geared towards.
Posted on Reply
#40
Hood
This is just the normal NVIDIA cash grab, this card is for those few who have too much money and a desire to have the absolute fastest hardware, for a month or two. Us working folks need not be concerned, or even covet this. The same performance at 1/4 the price will be along shortly...
Posted on Reply
#41
levish
Not that I'm in the market for a $3,000 card (my 1080ti was more than expensive enough) but I wonder what the OC headroom on it is like. If it is anything like the 980ti it'd be quite good.
Posted on Reply
#42
bug
levishNot that I'm in the market for a $3,000 card (my 1080ti was more than expensive enough) but I wonder what the OC headroom on it is like. If it is anything like the 980ti it'd be quite good.
An interesting point. Given these don't sell in large numbers, there probably aren't that many aftermarket cooling solution for them. Then again, these are almost exclusively reference designs (and high-priced) so maybe there are.
Posted on Reply
#43
Slizzo
levishNot that I'm in the market for a $3,000 card (my 1080ti was more than expensive enough) but I wonder what the OC headroom on it is like. If it is anything like the 980ti it'd be quite good.
Boost 3.0 largely negates the OC ability of NVIDIA cards as it already tries to run at the highest clocks it is able to while staying withing the power and temp targets.
Posted on Reply
#44
levish
The same was said for earlier versions too, those also have locked down ranges so products don't encroach on others in the lineup.
Posted on Reply
#45
bug
SlizzoBoost 3.0 largely negates the OC ability of NVIDIA cards as it already tries to run at the highest clocks it is able to while staying withing the power and temp targets.
I don't think it negates it. Renders it redundant seems like a more appropriate description.
Posted on Reply
#46
Chaitanya
Gamers nexus has posted their review of this GPU:
Posted on Reply
#47
Fluffmeister
Interesting conclusions from GN:
Purely observationally, based on the data we have presently collected, it would appear that the Titan V has two primary behaviors: (1) Applications which are built atop low-level APIs and asynchronous computational pipelines appear to process more efficiently on the Titan V; (2) the Titan V appears to host more cores than some of these applications (namely D3D11 titles) can meaningfully use, and that is demonstrated fully upon overclocking.

Given that overclocks in D3D11 applications produce performance uplift of ~20% (in some instances), it would appear that the high core count becomes more of a burden than a benefit. The GPU needs the faster clocks, and can’t access or leverage its high core count in a meaningful way. The result is that the Titan V begins to tie with the Titan Xp, and that the 1080 Ti closes-in on the Titan V. In lower-level API games, however, the Titan V pulls away by large margins – 27% to 40%, in some cases. The gains are big enough that we retested numerous times on numerous cards, but they remained. Our present analysis is that these applications are better able to spin-off multiple, simultaneous, in-flight render jobs across the high core count, whereas the tested Dx11 titles may function more synchronously.

As for the Titan V specifically, it can certainly be used for games -- but only in the context of, "I bought this thing for work, and sometimes I play games." If you're just gaming, clearly, this isn't the right purchase.
Some nice follow ups over @ Beyond3D too including some crypto testing:

forum.beyond3d.com/threads/nvidia-volta-speculation-thread.53930/page-46
Posted on Reply
#48
SIGSEGV
well, I don't think this benchmark has the impressive result. the culprit must be the unoptimized driver for that titan volta. ah, I know, they must reserve the 2080Ti for milking the cows. They just need making the uproar news and reviews Ti beating titan with 'impressive result' then profit. double kill. ;-D
Posted on Reply
#49
Fluffmeister
Naturally, only AMD get a free pass on day-0 drivers.
Posted on Reply
#50
londiste
FluffmeisterInteresting conclusions from GN:
Gamersnexus' conclusions seem pretty baseless. All the talk about Async and DX12 will get them clicks but actual results do not show anything of the sort.

Their claims are mostly based on two games - Doom and Sniper Elite 4:
- Doom and its engine (especially with Vulkan) is technically awesome and scales extremely well (provided that 200fps cap is not reached which does get problematic even at high resolutions with ultra-highend).
- Sniper Elite 4 is so far the only DX12 game that gets clear benefit from the lower level API across the board and it does not hurt that it also scales extremely well.

Now look at other tests they did:
- AOTS (DX12 and Async technical showcase) scales badly, even once they use something else beyond their usual High settings that are CPU limited. This, by the way, speaks directly against their DX12/Async claims.
- Hellblade scales well despite being Unreal Engine game using DX11.
- Wildlands, For Honor, Destiny are likely limited by something else (Destiny highest settings graphs show that well enough).

From my own experience, even 1080Ti gets CPU limited often enough at 1440p with highest settings. Titan V is around 40% faster which roughly matches the additional horsepower UHD needs compared to 1440p. CPU limitations are real and often enough engine or game themselves prove to be limiting.

In some cases, Titan V actually is too fast for now.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Dec 25th, 2024 09:19 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts