Titan goes live

[MrRiplEy[H]]

I did a quick check on the EVGA site on the current product line of cards & I had to go all the way back to the 6 series (6000 series) of vid cards to find any reference to using the 400 Mhz ramdac chips. The 7 series seems to be fully discontinued & w/ the 8 series (8000 series) that are listed & forward they show to be using the CUDA cores for shader purposes & no mention of ramdac chips at all.

I got this data off the product spec sheets that are listed w/ the product.

Given this info Gyrene I would have to say that the 400Mhz ramdac chips were done away with some time ago on Nvidia cards after the 6-7 series............unless the CUDA core lingo is covert code to mask the continuance of using the ramdac chips........................ ......

 

Cuda and ramdac are two different things. Ramdac is the component that converts the digital image signal for analog monitors to view. Nvidia was notorious for poor RF filtering in the analog circuit which caused a very soft and blurry image quality on vga monitors. This is the reason why I stoped buying Nvidia back in the days and I guess the decision has stuck even through nowadays there would be no reason for it.

[Pudgie]

Cuda and ramdac are two different things. Ramdac is the component that converts the digital image signal for analog monitors to view. Nvidia was notorious for poor RF filtering in the analog circuit which caused a very soft and blurry image quality on vga monitors. This is the reason why I stoped buying Nvidia back in the days and I guess the decision has stuck even through nowadays there would be no reason for it.

Thanks, MrRiplEy for the explaination.

After I had typed that I went & did a search on ramdac chips & found that out but I appreciate your response.

Yep I remember the soft & blurry images when I had my ViewSonic 21PS CRT monitor (from the 5, 6 & 7 series Nvidia cards). I didn't jump on the 8 series when they came out as I needed a platform upgrade then to make that seem sensible (had a EVGA 7900 GTX+ card on an Intel P4 Northwood set up then....once I upgraded to the AMD Athlon X2 system using a Nvidia-based Asus A8-N mobo I jumped to the EVGA 9800 GTX+ vid card).

I stayed w/ EVGA Nvidia cards over ATI (now AMD) as they always seemed to perform better on my systems from a graphical smoothness under load standpoint. Yes the ATI cards did look better graphically overall, but w/ the Athlon upgrade I also got to liking the Nvidia-chipped mobos as opposed to Intel so was more reason to stick w/ Nvidia then.

I haven't noticed any blurry images from Nvidia cards since the 9800 GTX+ vid card. I went w/ a HP 2710m LCD monitor after my CRT gave up shortly there after & went fully DVI signal then instead of VGA........maybe the reason why. When the CRT (ViewSonic UltraBrite A91f+ 17" approx 10 yrs old now) gives up on my wife's box I'll give her this HP & I'll be looking for a 2560 x 1600 IPS panel LCD monitor then, probably around a 30"-32" size. 120Hz speed is nice if the price is right but 60Hz is good enough for me.

With my current Intel X79 set up I can go either way so we'll see what AMD comes up with after TITAN/GTX 700 series to compete with. The AMD Tahiti-based cards are looking interesting.................. ...........

But that will depend on what Hitech & crew do going forward w/ AHII as far as graphics are concerned cause as of right now I don't EVEN need to worry about graphics performance in AH for quite some time w/ this EVGA GTX TITAN as they are absolutely beautiful in every aspect....................... ......

 

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Thanks, MrRiplEy for the explaination.

After I had typed that I went & did a search on ramdac chips & found that out but I appreciate your response.

Yep I remember the soft & blurry images when I had my ViewSonic 21PS CRT monitor (from the 5, 6 & 7 series Nvidia cards). I didn't jump on the 8 series when they came out as I needed a platform upgrade then to make that seem sensible (had a EVGA 7900 GTX+ card on an Intel P4 Northwood set up then....once I upgraded to the AMD Athlon X2 system using a Nvidia-based Asus A8-N mobo I jumped to the EVGA 9800 GTX+ vid card).

I stayed w/ EVGA Nvidia cards over ATI (now AMD) as they always seemed to perform better on my systems from a graphical smoothness under load standpoint. Yes the ATI cards did look better graphically overall, but w/ the Athlon upgrade I also got to liking the Nvidia-chipped mobos as opposed to Intel so was more reason to stick w/ Nvidia then.

I haven't noticed any blurry images from Nvidia cards since the 9800 GTX+ vid card. I went w/ a HP 2710m LCD monitor after my CRT gave up shortly there after & went fully DVI signal then instead of VGA........maybe the reason why. When the CRT (ViewSonic UltraBrite A91f+ 17" approx 10 yrs old now) gives up on my wife's box I'll give her this HP & I'll be looking for a 2560 x 1600 IPS panel LCD monitor then, probably around a 30"-32" size. 120Hz speed is nice if the price is right but 60Hz is good enough for me.

With my current Intel X79 set up I can go either way so we'll see what AMD comes up with after TITAN/GTX 700 series to compete with. The AMD Tahiti-based cards are looking interesting.................. ...........

But that will depend on what Hitech & crew do going forward w/ AHII as far as graphics are concerned cause as of right now I don't EVEN need to worry about graphics performance in AH for quite some time w/ this EVGA GTX TITAN as they are absolutely beautiful in every aspect....................... ......

 

Yes the digital DVI/HDMI/DP connections do not suffer from the analog filtering problem.

[Pudgie]

For those interested...................

I've ran some different setting levels in AHII at the driver level to determine where GPU Boost would put the GPU clock speeds according to setting load levels:

Set all other settings in driver AF, TAA to max settings (16x AF, 8x SS TAA) w/ TF set at High Quality (max) & V-synch at On....this left the AA settings to determine the load as follows. Left the card at stock settings:

At 8x CSAA GPU Boost put GPU around the base GPU clock speed of 837 Mhz (814-827).
At 8x AA GPU Boost put GPU slightly above the base clock speed of 837 Mhz (840-852).
At 16x CSAA GPU Boost put GPU pretty much in between the base clock speed of 837 Mhz & close to advertised boost speed of 876 Mhz (852-872).
At 16x QCSAA & up GPU Boost put GPU at max vBIOS boost speed of 980 Mhz.

GPU temp levels held around 57*C-62*C & 52%-74% power level thruout the testing so I experienced no GPU throttling in any of these runs because of temp/power....only due to AA setting levels.

The game ran flawless thruout this process but the experience was noticeably crisper as the GPU speeds were boosted upwards.

I then started messing w/ the GPU offset setting alone to see where it would go on stock temp/power settings (80*C/100% power):

At 100% offset GPU hit 1072 Mhz flatlined w/ no temp/power increases measured.
At 200% offset GPU hit 1172 Mhz flatlined again w/ no temp/power increases measured.

Stock mem speeds flatlined at 3005 Mhz (had posted 3502 Mhz earlier...that was an error in typing...sorry) thruout the whole process.

All data came from PrecisionX 4.10.

 

I stopped here as I didn't want to go any higher

[BoilerDown]

The GTX 780 just went live.

Hard release, 10% slower than the Titan at 65% of its price.  And after overclock, they are essentially equal (unless you need > 3 GB of RAM).  

If I had to guess, when both are overclocked they will still be very close, closer than the un-overclocked 10% difference, because the limitation will be heat, and the GTX780 produces slightly less of it, allowing it to be pushed slightly harder.

http://hardocp.com/article/2013/05/23/nvidia_geforce_gtx_780_video_card_review
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6973/nvidia-geforce-gtx-780-review

If I hadn't bought a 4GB 680 about 6 months ago, I'd be all over this.  For now I'm going to play it cool for a month, then make a decision, the 680 can be resold for a high value still.  I might wait for a double memory 780 like the 680 I currently have.

Skipping this generation isn't unreasonable either.  $650 is a lot for an GTX x80 at release, normally they're $500.  AMD hasn't been holding up their end of the bargain, so Nvidia gets to price as high as they want.  Its funny, without the Titan, people would be pissed about this price point, but now everyone is going to say "its a $350 cheaper Titan, so its worth it".  That's certainly what my instinct is telling me.

[Debrody]

So this baby-titan is the 780, guessing the 680 will transform into the 770, the 670 into the 760ti and so.
A fast one for sure, but if money doesnt count, the winner is the titan or the 7990, or if price-performance comes into the equation, a 7970 GHz edition is just 10-15% slower...
And betcha there wont be a gtx790, thwe GK110 is just that unbelivably huge : )

[BoilerDown]

If they price the 770, 760 Ti, 760, etc the same as the equivalent 600 series when they were first released, AMD could be really really screwed.  If they price them higher, which they could do because of the lack of competition, IMO it means they actually want AMD to remain a competitor instead of kicking them out of the market entirely.

[Debrody]

If they price the 770, 760 Ti, 760, etc the same as the equivalent 600 series when they were first released, AMD could be really really screwed.  If they price them higher, which they could do because of the lack of competition, IMO it means they actually want AMD to remain a competitor instead of kicking them out of the market entirely.

What youre drinking Sir, the 7970 GHz edition is a good 10% faster yet cheaper than the 680... for the same 1000$, the 7990 is quite a bit faster than the titan or the 690...
Now if the NVidia could cut the prices by a good 20%, they would be in a nice advantage, but honestly, this 700 series offers nothing new, only a slightly slower version of the titan and some renamings. The same thing is quite possible on the amd 8k series though..
Still, i hopingly hope that the competition forces the prices down a bit, as novadays video cards are just amazingly expensive, just compare the 2009 upper-mid range HD4850/GTX260 to the 2013 mid range 7870/660Ti...

[Gman]

I just sold my 2 4 gb 680 GTX's, and my 780 will be here tomorrow.  I'll post some results with AH2 sometime in the evening.  The 3 gb card with a moderate overclock using Afterburner will exceed the Titan superclocked card by about 3% with most of the games I'm playing, I saw it up close and personal at the shop I deal with, who had sold out of 780's in a couple of hours. 

The 780 is easily the best performance for the $ of the higher end cards.  That said, AMD is waiting until after the summer to release it's really new tech, but the 7990 tests so far show it to be faster than the Titan and the 780, but no accurate pricing exists yet to compare it to the nVidia.  The 780 will be my last card swap until fall when the new AMD stuff will be out.

[BoilerDown]

The Nvidia GTX 770 is out, and as I predicted its MSRP is $400.  It is essentially a souped up GTX 680.  It benches better than the 7970 GE at a lower price (although if you sell the 7970's game bundle, they end up the same).

I would expect the GTX 760 Ti, when it comes out, to win its price performance battle vs AMD as well.  Considering AMD doesn't have new parts due until the end of Q4 this year (if not later), the red team could be hurting; expect prices to drop or game bundles / rebates to get better.

If you're looking for a video card and are spending less than $400, it would be wise to hold off for another month or two to give time for the price wars to work in your favor.  At $400 or above, Nvidia is the way to go.

[Debrody]

The only difference between the 680 and the 770 is, the 770 runs at 1048MHz by stock, instead of the 680s 1006MHz. 4-5%. More or less the same performance as the 7970GE (a little more when some new effects disabled, a bit less on full). And yes, its a tiny bit cheaper than the 680, even though its a "new product" and the prices are likely to go down a bit in a couple weeks. And the most important, its finally cheaper than the 7970GE!

Im happy and not. Happy because i can buy the same product cheaper, also the AMD has to do something, as it has a better price/performance ratio than their card. And not because a x70, and also an x80 GPU has never been this expensive before. We are getting very far from the "golden age" when a 4850 or a gtx260+ was no more than 200-220$.

[BoilerDown]

Im happy and not. Happy because i can buy the same product cheaper, also the AMD has to do something, as it has a better price/performance ratio than their card. And not because a x70, and also an x80 GPU has never been this expensive before.

Not true.  The GTX 670 debuted at $399, same as the GTX 770.  The GTX 280 debuted at $650, same as the GTX 780.  There are no historical high prices here, with inflation they are actually cheaper than the negative examples I cite.

People were actually surprised the 770 was priced as low as it was.  They were expecting $450.  AMD needs to step up so that the next ?80 part will be priced at the lower end of its historical range, rather than the higher end, I'll agree with that.