Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Hardware

Nvidia Titan Xp Introduced as 'the World's Most Powerful Graphics Card' (pcgamer.com) 69

Nvidia has unveiled its new Titan, the Xp. It features 3840 Cuda cores running at 1.6GHz, and 12GB of DDR5X memory. The card runs on Nvidia's Pascal architecture and comes with a suitably titanic price tag of $1200. From a report: "They made 1080 Ti so fast that they need a new top-tier Titan," says PC Gamer hardware expert Jarred Walton. "It's the full GP102 chip, so just like we had GTX 780, the Titan, the 780 Ti and the Titan Black, we're getting the 1080, Titan X (Pascal), 1080 Ti, and Titan Xp."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Nvidia Titan Xp Introduced as 'the World's Most Powerful Graphics Card'

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Hope AMD hurries up, Nvidia's going to have to start, "0% financing" just like new cars had to do to get people able to afford their products.

  • How long will it be before this card is available at Big Lots for $5. I might be able to get one then.

    • Roughly ten years, but you can probably already get it for $50 in about five years.
    • How long will it be before this card is available at Big Lots for $5. I might be able to get one then.

      Six months and the price will be reasonable fo the technology.

      • There really isn't much point in doing things like Seti@home with them, as a couple of years down the road, everything you did before with previous cards can be doubled in a few months with the latest ones. 3800 cuda cores? jfc why bother?

      • Six months and the price will be reasonable for the technology.

        Yup. And in six months there will be a new card proclaiming to be 'the World's Most Powerful Graphics Card'.

        That's the thing about buying items at the bleeding edge, or buying the pinnacle product: they don't stay in that position for very long.

        Typically it is better to buy one or two items back from the best so you don't get the 'premium item' cost penalty, then keep using it for as long as it works for your needs.

      • Such a bland card. Twice the money of a GTX 1080 Ti for 10% more FLOPS. It does not even use HBM. The half precision and double precision performance is still nerfed. It's got like 1/4 the DP FLOPS of a 2013 GTX Titan. The card is only good for SP FLOPS. So it is useless for a power user which wants to do something other than gaming.

  • Meanwhile, I'm still rocking a GeForce 7950GTX. Yeah, the newest game I've played is Portal. 1. I'm sure I'll get back to gaming some day -- the Bio Shock games look amazing to me (and I'm sure there are even newer, better games than those). But, right now in life, it just hasn't seemed as important or interesting as it used to.
    • by ichthus ( 72442 )
      ... I've always said that if Half Life 3 is ever made, that'll be the game that gets me motivated to return to the gaming world.
      • by Pascoea ( 968200 )
        Good news then, if you look on the forums people say it'll be out in less than 6 months.
      • Based on previous recent games, Half Life 3 will probably be a stripped down, console-style FPS with fewer weapons, quick time events or equivalent, and save points. The PC version will just be a port of the console one because build for the console because a near-flop on that will earn more than a hit on the PC.

    • I've got a 4790k Intel Core i7 with HD Graphics. It plays 3D games alright, but Hollow Knight struggles. That is to say: Unity 3D games with 2D or 3D graphics and complex, shiny effects can get 24fps at 1900x1080; Unreal Engine games with high-resolution sprites and few real-time effects struggle and stutter at 1200x800 resolution, making platforming nigh-impossible and rendering games unplayable. Not that Hollow Knight doesn't look as good as any Unity 3D game--the art style is fantastic--it's that Ho

      • by epyT-R ( 613989 )

        intel gpus were never really meant for gaming.. I don't know why you built a system to do it without an aftermarket gpu.

        • Intel graphics increasingly are meant to run games : foremost, if some people upgrade to a 4790K or 6600K it might have the best graphics hardware they ever had, because it beats e.g. geforce 7600GT (~2006) or Radeon 5450 (~2009) and others.
          Then, they got a bit better of their goal of being barely able to run anything. Like, the two cards I mentioned above are deprecated. In fact, look at the low end market and the fact you still can buy geforce 210, Radeon 5450, 6450, R5 230. That's deprecated! (nvidia pro

          • by epyT-R ( 613989 )

            I agree they've improved their 3D support quite a bit over the 'intel media decelerators' of the 9xx series, but they don't compare to modern geforce or radeon gpus once you move up beyond bare budget (as you said many of those are based on obsolete designs). However, as the gp said, they still don't run modern engines very well at native resolutions for most panels.

          • by Khyber ( 864651 )

            "Intel graphics increasingly are meant to run games : foremost, if some people upgrade to a 4790K or 6600K it might have the best graphics hardware they ever had, because it beats e.g. geforce 7600GT (~2006) or Radeon 5450 (~2009) and others."

            I haven't seen an onboard Intel GPU yet that can top a 7950GT. When the intel can run Street Fighter X Tekken at 40+ FPS like the 7950GT can, then we can talk. Until then, it's not even close to being decent enough for gaming.

        • I built a system to run a programming environment, and it happened to run games fairly well.
          • by epyT-R ( 613989 )

            Yeah, that's fine, but your previous post suggested you were expecting to game with it so I tried to explain after you complained about UE4 not running well. The problem is that intel gpus do not have the raw fillrate (and possibly features) to run modern titles well at high resolutions.

            • My point was that modern titles with OpenGL shaders, real-time lighting, and the like run at around 30fps for many games, notably games written in Unity 3D; while you'll hit games with hardly anything technically-impressive (e.g. Hollow Knight) that can't run at low-resolution without straining to get more than 4fps during action scenes. As a general rule, a Unity 3D game will run with much less resource consumption and a higher frame rate to provide similar visual effects of technical complexity to a rea

    • You won't be disappointed by bioshock. They really are good games. One and Infinite anyway, I've not played Two so can't say on that.

      • by Dins ( 2538550 )
        2 is ok. Most didn't like it as much, but if you liked 1, I think it's kind of more of the same. Bioshock 1 is a phenomenal game with incredibly atmosphere if you've not played the series.
    • I've been wanting to get back to Diablo 2, Never Winter Nights, and GTA iV for some time now.
    • Meanwhile, I'm still rocking a GeForce 7950GTX. Yeah, the newest game I've played is Portal. 1. I'm sure I'll get back to gaming some day -- the Bio Shock games look amazing to me (and I'm sure there are even newer, better games than those). But, right now in life, it just hasn't seemed as important or interesting as it used to.

      Translation: I discovered that sex was something I could have with people OTHER than myself.

  • Titan Xp (Score:5, Funny)

    by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Thursday April 06, 2017 @01:01PM (#54186041)

    Future versions: Titan Vista, Titan 7 ...

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I'll wait for Titan 3.11 for workgroups.

    • I'm waiting for the Titan :) as it should be much nicer than Titan Xp.
  • by Billly Gates ( 198444 ) on Thursday April 06, 2017 @01:07PM (#54186081) Journal

    To both AMD and to those who are just waiting on their 1080 TIs and those who got their 1080s a few months ago.

    With Vega coming out in 72 hours gamers will see not only that it doesn't beat the 1080ti and Titan XP they will giggle shrug shoulders and pretend AMD is irrelevant now. Shame.

    In am alternative universe without AMD both the ti and Titan XP wouldn't exist. They exist solely to screw AMD because Nvidia was aware of launch date. What PC gamers don't realize this harms the platform and makes console peasants more attractive. Ha! $700 for a GPU??! My whole PS4 is $399 ...Giggles. :-(

    Nvidia is doing everything they can to take Mindshare and money from gamers at anyway possible.

    • With Vega coming out in 72 hours

      Nope.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Comparing a GPU that costs $700 (or $400, for the sake of price equivalence) with a console makes as much sense as comparing a bike with a car.

      Let people that think a bike is ok buy the damn bike and be happy with it. There's (almost) no shame in that.

    • by Dins ( 2538550 )

      To both AMD and to those who are just waiting on their 1080 TIs and those who got their 1080s a few months ago.

      I just got my 1080 (not Ti), but it was $540, not $1,200. So I'm good, thanks...

  • by Dins ( 2538550 ) on Thursday April 06, 2017 @01:22PM (#54186147)
    ...will it run Crysis?
    • ...will it run Crysis?

      Probably. Crysis was a game that required a Geforce 8800 to run suitably in 1080p, even with things sorta-high. However, the GPU in my current laptop mops the floor [gpuboss.com] with it in specs, it wasn't the highest end GPU I could have chosen at the time, and it's over a year old. For that matter, the GPU of my last laptop [gpuboss.com] largely outpaces it. I have no issues running Crysis at 1080p on ultra mode. Meanwhile, CryEngine has gotten more optimizations; the system requirements for Crysis 2 were similar but the performan

  • ....until next quarter or the second half of the year, when we get an even more powerful graphics card!

  • that the usual reviewers/tech websites got wind of the news like everyone else (from the official NVIDIA website). That doesn't happen too often.
  • by Misagon ( 1135 ) on Thursday April 06, 2017 @03:39PM (#54187153)

    This is getting weirder and more confusing now ...

    As the top of the "Maxwell"-architecture 900-series, NVidia released the "GeForce GTX Titan X" in March 2015.
    Then in August last year, as the top of the "Pascal"-architecture 10-series, NVidia released a new Titan ... this time calling it "Titan X".
    This new name did not contain the "GeForce GTX" prefix, but who the Elle says the entire long product name every time, right?
    So several high-profile reviewers started calling it "Titan XP" - with the "P" for "Pascal", to distinguish it from the previous "Titan X" in the Maxwell generation.

    And now, NVidia has released a new card with the official name "Titan Xp". I think there is no way that they would not be aware of the older card being called that.
    Even worse. both cards called "Titan XP" (and the "GeForce GTX 1080 Ti") are the same GPU (NVidia GP102) with different binning - I.e. some units switched off on the cheaper cards.

    The GP102 chip is also used in the top of their Quadro line of workstation graphics cards ... My guess is that the better-binned chips they had intended for Quadro cards did not sell as well as they had thought and therefore saw an opportunity to sell them at a high price as their new top consumer card.

"Conversion, fastidious Goddess, loves blood better than brick, and feasts most subtly on the human will." -- Virginia Woolf, "Mrs. Dalloway"

Working...