Brad_Hawthorne

Vlada011
Titan Black is peace of Art compare to AMD Radeon.
From every side you look NVIDIA have that chip two years and AMD still no stronger card of full unlocked GK110.
If you compare chip, performance, driver, stock cooler, huge amount of video memory...
AMD never had something like that in their offer.

Keep drinking the koolaid and buying $1000 video cards. Nvidia love you long time for it.

RainStryke
The original Titan released in February 2013 is basically on par with performance with a R9 290X that was sold for just about half the price of a titan on release in October 2013. Titan Black came out in February 18th, 2014 which basically matched the performance of what a GTX 780Ti puts out in games, from a gaming perspective, it makes no sense to get a Titan Black if you could just get the same thing out of a GTX 780Ti.
 
The Titan Black actually released at $1099. Retail was maybe $999... but all of the stores were selling them for $1099 on release.
 
Not sure what he means about piece of art... Since the cooler on the card is basically the same as the original GTX 780 reference card. It's the same reference blower style fan that get loud when under load. Also... AMD's reference cooler is the same damn thing with different colors. lol
 
Also not sure what he's talking about when comparing drivers. If you look at the perspective of a user that wants to use multiple displays, AMD is way ahead of Nvidia. 

RainStryke
Yeah, I have no knowledge of 3D rendering, but I guess that's a good card in that respect. Not even sure how they do against FirePro cards or even know anything about either quattro or firepro cards. Seems to be even more of a niche market than PC gaming by far.
 
I suppose it's not as loud, but they are still loud. According to this review, the reference cooler can get up to 70dB
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/graphics/display/gigabyte-geforce-gtx-titan-black-ghz-edition_4.html#sect0
 
My R9 290X is nowhere near that, but I also don't have a reference card. My Tri-X is 37dB according to this review:
http://www.techpowerup.co..._290X_Tri-X_OC/23.html

lehpron

seta8967
 
My friend said the quattro and firepro will destroy it, but for amateur rendering and designing it does well enough. He would love to have dedicated professional cards but 4k+ is too much. It is a niche market, big companies will use quattro/firepro and gamers will user geforce/radeon. I know some upstart gaming industries like Cloud Imperium Gaming use Titans, and indie devs too, but that is still such a small niche that might be growing but not as fast to demand a card for it imo.

I would have said the same.
 
 
nVidia's Titan series is like Intel's X-platform, they are ported and rebranded server/workstation parts with a few things disabled to bring the price down to consumers, but still priced higher than what most consumers could purchase-- except with enough extra features enabled to sell exclusively to those that want those features.  All the while, regular consumer parts could perform close or exceed at a cheaper price.  As such, both companies dominate their respective markets and can afford to waste high-grade dies to get extra premium customer support-- AMD can't do either for CPU or GPU.  Not being dominant means can't afford to make a consumer-version of their FirePro cards or give enthusiasts unlocked versions of their Opterons above 8-core; they would loose money from precious dies that could fetch higher premiums if they remain professional.
 
nVidia and Intel are lucky to have the opportunity to invent and maintain these new product segments; except where on CPU Intel may not get competition to their X-platform for a while, graphics is still competitive and nVidia may temporarily discontinue Titan if AMD gets back in the game.
 
nVidia doesn't have a major CPU division (Tegra is growing but not x86) and Intel doesn't have a major GPU division (Iris is growing, but not ARM), so AMD has their work cut out for them (Skybridge will be both ARM & x86) and I applaud the fact that they still exist despite what they are up against.

ARMYguy
Nvidia is smart, by locking me into Nvidia cards cause of the shield tablet, and my Asus swift LCD with g sync, i literally couldn't buy a AMD card even if i wanted to.

seta8967

Baltothewolf

ARMYguy
Nvidia is smart, by locking me into Nvidia cards cause of the shield tablet, and my Asus swift LCD with g sync, i literally couldn't buy a AMD card even if i wanted to.

Couldn't speak on shield, but at least us AMD users don't have to spend extra for adaptive V-sync :P

You do know that the monitors that support vesa a-sync are going to be more expensive than their non a-synch models

"Such LCD panels naturally cost more to manufacture and validate"

Source: http://support.amd.com/en-us/search/faq/225

I am curious as to how free-synch will work. On the FAQ is this.
7
"Using DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync, the graphics card can detect and set an appropriate maximum and minimum refresh rate based on the capabilities reported by the display."

So is it different than gsynch where it reads the gpu to set the framerate? Whenever I ask on reddit or other tech sites the fans from both sides cone spouting improper sources and misinformation.

RainStryke

seta8967

RainStryke

candle_86
you know what, this is insane, no one threw this much of a fit back in 03, when Radeon and FX where cheating on 3dmark

I remember when Nvidia had the upper hand on Vantage due to physx for a long time.

But thats a feature for all nvidia cards. Not a lie/cheat for demo cards falsifying scores.

No, when you had phsyx on, it assisted the CPU score and highly inflated the score. It was also falsifying scores, cause the CPU tests were for the CPU, not for the GPU and CPU.