Read more.A Titan X in all but name?
Read more.A Titan X in all but name?
virtuo (09-03-2017)
Wish AMD would hurry up with Vega! This is a beast of a graphics card though, I wish I had a 4k screen so I could justify buying one of these!
Currently my 290 is still holding up well at 1080p on a TV and 1440p on my monitor, need some more demanding games or a higher resolution screen I think.
LOL,this it is faster than a Titan X and draws the same power.
"A Titan in all but name"....and price. Shows what a con the Titan X is.
Doom:
"Even the Radeon Fury X manages well in excess of 100 frames per second at the 4K test"
60fps.
I like the removal of the DVI connector, it gives the potential to go "single slot" if watercooling.
Still waiting for Vega...
How underwhelming. I hyped it up in my mind so much I was expecting way more. Dunno why as I should have just looked at X benchmarks.
If the AIO models come in at £700 I'll buy one. But can't see that happening. Might just get a 1080 and SLI the bugger.
Nice, but does those new 378.78 drivers really (I mean really) deliver more performance on DX12? Cuz if it doesn't then I think I'll buy an AMD card next time around, doesn't matter how much Tis Nvidia rubbishrubbishrubbishrubbish around.
How big is the market for these cards?
CAT-THE-FIFTH (09-03-2017)
Very nice card indeed, not planning to go 4k for the foreseeable though so I think the 1070 will be enough for my needs for a while. I think once 4k is the mainstream standard I will look at it again, although I am sure there will be far better cards out by then too
I do feel sorry for the folks who bought a 1080 or titan very recently not realizing this was coming!
"Not full implementation of GP102"
Thank you!
I posted something about that on Ars and got downvoted to oblivion, probably by zealous Nvidia fans or people who didn't properly read my post.
I simply do not believe that yields can be so low on GP102 now that Nvidia cannot release a "full-fat" GP102 implementation with 3840 shaders (30 blocks enabled instead of just 28) along with the max number of texture units (I think that'd be 240) and ROPs (96 I presume, unless they go beyond a 384-bit memory bus).
As such, once again it feels like Nvidia is deliberately holding back just so it can release a new Titan X (or whatever) for the same >$1000+ price tag and claim it's still the enthusiast's hero. What's worse is that people still defend Nvidia for these kind of practices, just like how people defend Intel!
I really, really hope that AMD isn't going to drop the ball with Vega or price it above Nvidia, just so that Nvidia has to actually compete a bit again. When there's no competition, we'll still get faster products, but they won't be as fast or as cheap as they should be.
I think they just want to keep a "better" titan in the barrel, just in case.
Seems like a good card, but really wouldn't consider a base version without much better thermals.
And the performance increase doesn't seem anywhere near the "35%" that was claimed. Not that those claims are ever true.
Still. Want.
What a monster! I hope AMD's big talk with Vega isn't just big talk and with Volta coming too they need to do well. Standard 1080s are falling in price and ebay will be awash with even cheaper 1080s. Just saw a good used 1080 go for the same price as a new 1070. For gamers there's no reason to go for the Titan unless you just like the name!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)