NVIDIA’s GeForce GTX Titan Review, Part 2: Titan's Performance Unveiled
by Ryan Smith & Rahul Garg on February 21, 2013 9:00 AM ESTEarlier this week NVIDIA announced their new top-end single-GPU consumer card, the GeForce GTX Titan. Built on NVIDIA’s GK110 and named after the same supercomputer that GK110 first powered, the GTX Titan is in many ways the apex of the Kepler family of GPUs first introduced nearly one year ago. With anywhere between 25% and 50% more resources than NVIDIA’s GeForce GTX 680, Titan is intended to be the ultimate single-GPU card for this generation.
Meanwhile with the launch of Titan NVIDIA has repositioned their traditional video card lineup to change who the ultimate video card will be chasing. With a price of $999 Titan is decidedly out of the price/performance race; Titan will be a luxury product, geared towards a mix of low-end compute customers and ultra-enthusiasts who can justify buying a luxury product to get their hands on a GK110 video card. So in many ways this is a different kind of launch than any other high performance consumer card that has come before it.
So where does that leave us? On Tuesday we could talk about Titan’s specifications, construction, architecture, and features. But the all-important performance data would be withheld another two days until today. So with Thursday finally upon us, let’s finish our look at Titan with our collected performance data and our analysis.
Titan: A Performance Summary
GTX Titan | GTX 690 | GTX 680 | GTX 580 | |
Stream Processors | 2688 | 2 x 1536 | 1536 | 512 |
Texture Units | 224 | 2 x 128 | 128 | 64 |
ROPs | 48 | 2 x 32 | 32 | 48 |
Core Clock | 837MHz | 915MHz | 1006MHz | 772MHz |
Shader Clock | N/A | N/A | N/A | 1544MHz |
Boost Clock | 876Mhz | 1019MHz | 1058MHz | N/A |
Memory Clock | 6.008GHz GDDR5 | 6.008GHz GDDR5 | 6.008GHz GDDR5 | 4.008GHz GDDR5 |
Memory Bus Width | 384-bit | 2 x 256-bit | 256-bit | 384-bit |
VRAM | 6GB | 2 x 2GB | 2GB | 1.5GB |
FP64 | 1/3 FP32 | 1/24 FP32 | 1/24 FP32 | 1/8 FP32 |
TDP | 250W | 300W | 195W | 244W |
Transistor Count | 7.1B | 2 x 3.5B | 3.5B | 3B |
Manufacturing Process | TSMC 28nm | TSMC 28nm | TSMC 28nm | TSMC 40nm |
Launch Price | $999 | $999 | $499 | $499 |
On paper, compared to GTX 680, Titan offers anywhere between a 25% and 50% increase in resource. At the starting end, Titan comes with 25% more ROP throughput, a combination of Titan’s 50% increase in ROP count and simultaneous decrease in clockspeeds relative to GTX 680. Shading and texturing performance meanwhile benefits even more from the expansion of the number of SMXes, from 8 to 14. And finally, Titan has a full 50% more memory bandwidth than GTX 680.
Setting aside the unique scenario of compute for a moment, this means that Titan will be between 25% and 50% faster than GTX 680 in GPU limited situations, depending on the game/application and its mix of resource usage. For an industry and userbase still trying to come to terms with the loss of nearly annual half-node jumps, this kind of performance jump on the same node is quite remarkable. At the same time it also sets expectations for how future products may unfold; one way to compensate for the loss of the rapid cadence in manufacturing nodes is to spread out the gains from a new node over multiple years, and this is essentially what we’ve seen with the Kepler family by launching GK104, and a year later GK110.
In any case, while Titan can improve gaming performance by up to 50%, NVIDIA has decided to release Titan as a luxury product with a price roughly 120% higher than the GTX 680. This means that Titan will not be positioned to push the price of NVIDIA’s current cards down, and in fact it’s priced right off the currently hyper-competitive price-performance curve that the GTX 680/670 and Radeon HD 7970GE/7970 currently occupy.
February 2013 GPU Pricing Comparison | |||||
AMD | Price | NVIDIA | |||
$1000 | GeForce Titan/GTX 690 | ||||
(Unofficial) Radeon HD 7990 | $900 | ||||
Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition | $450 | GeForce GTX 680 | |||
Radeon HD 7970 | $390 | ||||
$350 | GeForce GTX 670 | ||||
Radeon HD 7950 | $300 |
This setup isn’t unprecedented – the GTX 690 more or less created this precedent last May – but it means Titan is a very straightforward case of paying 120% more for 50% more performance; the last 10% always costs more. What this means is that the vast majority of gamers will simply be shut out from Titan at this price, but for those who can afford Titan’s $999 price tag NVIDIA believes they have put together a powerful card and a convincing case to pay for luxury.
So what can potential Titan buyers look forward to on the performance front? As always we’ll do a complete breakdown of performance in the following pages, but we wanted to open up this article with a quick summary of performance. So with that said, let’s take a look at some numbers.
GeForce GTX Titan Performance Summary (2560x1440) | ||||||
vs. GTX 680 | vs. GTX 690 | vs. R7970GE | vs. R7990 | |||
Average | +47% | -15% | 34% | -19% | ||
Dirt: Showdown | 47% | -5% | 3% | -38% | ||
Total War: Shogun 2 | 50% | -15% | 62% | 1% | ||
Hitman: Absolution | 34% | -15% | 18% | -15% | ||
Sleeping Dogs | 49% | -15% | 17% | -30% | ||
Crysis | 54% | -13% | 21% | -25% | ||
Far Cry 3 | 35% | -23% | 37% | -15% | ||
Battlefield 3 | 48% | -18% | 52% | -11% | ||
Civilization V | 59% | -9% | 60% | 0 |
Looking first at NVIDIA’s product line, Titan is anywhere between 33% and 54% faster than the GTX 680. In fact with the exception of Hitman: Absolution, a somewhat CPU-bound benchmark, Titan’s performance relative to the GTX 680 is actually very consistent at a narrow 45%-55% range. Titan and GTX 680 are of course based on the same fundamental Kepler architecture, so there haven’t been any fundamental architecture changes between the two; Titan is exactly what you’d expect out of a bigger Kepler GPU. At the same time this is made all the more interesting due to the fact that Titan’s real-world performance advantage of 45%-55% is so close to its peak theoretical performance advantage of 50%, indicating that Titan doesn’t lose much (if anything) in efficiency when scaled up, and that the games we’re testing today favor memory bandwidth and shader/texturing performance over ROP throughput.
Moving on, while Titan offers a very consistent performance advantage over the architecturally similar GTX 680, it’s quite a different story when compared to AMD’s fastest single-GPU product, the Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition. As we’ve seen time and time again this generation, the difference in performance between AMD and NVIDIA GPUs not only varies with the test and settings, but dramatically so. As a result Titan is anywhere between being merely equal to the 7970GE to being nearly a generation ahead of it.
At the low-end of the scale we have DiRT: Showdown, where Titan’s lead is less than 3%. At the other end is Total War: Shogun 2, where Titan is a good 62% faster than the 7970GE. The average gain over the 7970GE is almost right in the middle at 34%, reflecting a mix of games where the two are close, the two are far, and the two are anywhere in between. With recent driver advancements having helped the 7970GE pull ahead of the GTX 680, NVIDIA had to work harder to take back their lead and to do so in an concrete manner.
Titan’s final competition are the dual-GPU cards of this generation, the GK104 based GTX 690, and the officially unofficial Tahiti based HD 7990 cards, which vary in specs but generally have just shy of the performance of a pair of 7970s. As we’ve seen in past generations, when it comes to raw performance one big GPU is no match for two smaller GPUs, and the same is true with Titan. For frames per second and nothing else, Titan cannot compete with those cards. But as we’ll see there are still some very good reasons for Titan’s existence, and areas Titan excels at that even two lesser GPUs cannot match.
None of this of course accounts for compute. Simply put, Titan stands alone in the compute world. As the first consumer GK110 GPU based video card there’s nothing quite like it. We’ll see why that is in our look at compute performance, but as far as the competitive landscape is concerned there’s not a lot to discuss here.
337 Comments
View All Comments
Tetracycloide - Thursday, February 21, 2013 - link
That's the thing, it's not a 'consumer gaming card.' It's a consumer compute card. Obviously the price for performance for gaming makes no sense but that's not their target market.ronin22 - Thursday, February 21, 2013 - link
This exactly!It's an amazing card for computing.
I wish I could get one...
Blazorthon - Thursday, February 21, 2013 - link
In reply to both of your comments, I have to ask this: If that is justification for its price, then why is it that AMD doesn't have their Tahiti cards priced like that and why didn't Nvidia price their previous consumer compute cards like that (GTX 280, GTX 285, GTX 480, GTX 580, etc.)?CommandoCATS - Friday, February 22, 2013 - link
Because this seems like a specialized thing for people who care about compute tasks within NVidia's CUDA universe (and things like iRay, which didn't exist when previous generations first came out).The truth is that in academia and research, CUDA is still the top dog (just do a google scholar search). I'm sure for most gamers, the GTX 680 is the way better deal. However, this is essentially a Tesla K20 for 1/3rd of the cost, so it's kind of a bargain from that perspective.
cheersloss - Saturday, February 23, 2013 - link
Exactly right. There is nothing about this card that is a value. The same compute functions were there in the older flagships as well, the gtx 580, 480, 280 etc.Titan is just an overpriced, overhyped trainwreck. Another attempt at a cashgrab on the gullible.
CeriseCogburn - Saturday, February 23, 2013 - link
The gullible that have the several thousands of extra they can spend that you don't have and cannot spend.Certainly poorboy feels better after having called his superiors gullible. The jelly is seeping through at an extraordinary rate.
cheersloss - Saturday, February 23, 2013 - link
Exactly right. There is nothing about this card that is a value. The same compute functions were there in the older flagships as well, the gtx 580, 480, 280 etc.Titan is just an overpriced, overhyped trainwreck. Another attempt at a cashgrab on the gullible.
CeriseCogburn - Saturday, February 23, 2013 - link
LOLGood you run the 280, and I'll run the Titan, and we can be equal and best friends, and I'll tell you over and over all the benchmarks and games and fps scores and compute tests are lying and your 280 is just as good and the same and you're right and I wish so badly that I was as poor as you and just bought a used 3 gen back nVidia card, but they fooled me, the gullible gamer.
CeriseCogburn - Tuesday, February 26, 2013 - link
ROFL - aww poor baby, now tessellation and compute is a total loss for amd, too as you conveniently forgot to include the 680, 670 660Ti 660 650Ti 650. hahahahha u people suck.So I can buy 2 amd cards that crash and don't run CF at all 33% of the time, or I can buy the most awesome top card in the entire world of gaming and play all the titles and be just great, or I can buy 2 nVidia cards and SLI them and have every game run except correctly except 1 while amd CF fails often...
I can buy the most stable, fully featured, many more featured nVidia card, or I can buy the dying no catalyst driver writers worth their salt (fired for savings) or left for better waters or headhunted, crashing piece of rotten unsupported glitching amd crap.
$999 looks like a bargain basement price to me. I can hardly wait to own The Shield, too.
Innovation. Awesomeness. New features. Unified drivers THAT JUST WORK.
Features ported BACKWARDS to prior generations.
Cuda
PhysX
Frame Rate Target
Boost
Stable dual card setups
Same game day drivers
Honest company not cheating liars like amd
I BUILT THIS co-founder Jen-Hsun Huang current CEO, a perfect example of the awesomeness of capitalism and personal success and the American Dream in REAL LIFE. lol
( Oh I bet those little OWS activist amd fanboys we have here are shooting blood through every pore)
Why in the world would I buy an amd card ? There's only one reason - to try to save a dying loser in a kind act of CHARITY - and frankly, what we have for amd fanboys is nothing short of the most evil little penny pinching crying whining baby SCROOGES I have ever seen.
So we can FORGET IT when it comes to the amd fanboy rabble here supporting AMD - they support only their own selfish fanboy agenda and psychotic public pocketbook panhandling.
I'd like to thank TheJian for pointing out amd fail coverage, vs the ignoring of the nVidia FINANCIAL SUCCESS STORY:
amd Q earnings coverage
"
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5465/amd-q411-fy-201...
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5764/amd-q112-earnin...
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6383/amd-q3-2012-ear...
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6690/amd-q412-and-fy...
"
nVidia Q earnings coverage
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6746/tegra-4-shipmen...
LOL - let it burn you crybabies to the CORE, I hope blood shoots from your eyes...
xaml - Sunday, March 3, 2013 - link
Don't leave out the biggest "crybaby" of all, yourself.