Complementing dividebyzero's comment, the Titan X retains the same 1/32 double-precision performance ratio like all other Maxwell-based GeForce cards. It's not like the original Titan, which came with a much higher 1/3 DP ratio. The original Titan was a prosumer product, the Titan X is not.
I stand corrected. Somehow, I am not surprised that DP performance was drastically cut. After all, the big guys can't sell DP card for top dollar if lower end cards have similar performance.
For solid 1440p perf, the AMD cards are a touch short too I think... also GTX970 isn't enough. 980 is borderline. The Ti looking like it covers it.
True the Titan X price is ridiculous, that said what do I know they sold really well so nice move Nvidia.
However keep in mind the GTX 980 Ti is 30% more expensive than the GTX 980 (at the new $500 price) and it is on average 25% faster. It was up to 37% faster in our benchmarks and worst case just 17% faster. -So not a bad deal when compared to the GTX 980 either, even at the new $500 price tag.
It is pretty simple really. If you want the most bang for your buck from Nvidia get the GTX 970, if you want the most bang for your buck and can see red and green then get the R9 290 or R9 290X. If you aren't too worried about value for money and just want as much performance as possible then the GTX 980 Ti is a nice fit. After all Nvidia can easily charge $650 for this card, its over 40% faster than the R9 290X and has no real competition... at the moment
It's more an architectural choice and trade off. Double precision and compute in general requires a lot of power and large registers to maximize the number of threads the GPU can handle in flight.
The Titan X isn't a compute card, but those benchmarks are OpenCL based (so a comparison can be made with AMD cards), whereas CUDA coded apps are as a general rule more mature, and much more effective. Compile a list of OpenCL and CUDA content creation apps and see which OCL surpass those of CUDA - it will be a short list indeed.
Thanks for the education. I must have missed that explanation in other reviews; I should start paying attention again.
Are you also averaging the extra cost in PSU? Your savings buying the GPU is spent in extra horsepower to push a dual GPU card. Bet you didn't think about that one did you?
Oh you mean $10 a year additional energy costs? That is nothing compared to the price difference between the actual cards, especially when considering you are going to get better performance out of it.
Unfortunately your story does not ring true. The 295x2 is water-cooled and has a relatively quiet fan. In addition it is temp locked to 75C and will throttle itself to prevent higher temps so your statement: "If he turns its cooler's fan down, temps climb real fast! 85-90C isn't uncommon while gaming if you want to keep the fan quiet." can't be true. In addition the temp lock has not been an issue for me, even overclocked about 8% with 15% additional power draw allowed. At those settings the max temp I reach is 72C. I have yet to encounter any blue screens or display driver errors and I sit stable at 100+ fps and no visible stutter with ultra settings in Ryse and Shadow of Mordor. Witcher 3 runs on max settings with 60-80 fps and the stutter issues I was experiencing have been fixed with the new drivers.
There was a lot of variation in temps with the review 295X2's.The culprits seem to be chassis orientation and airflow, and possibly variances in the thermal tape application over the VRM inductors. As the link notes, the heat build-up isn't from the GPUs (their heat is transferred away by the cold plates), but the voltage regulation area which has inadequate cooling (two thin strips of thermal tape backing onto a copper finned heatsink but boxed in by the GPU cooler/pump at each end). Once the VRMs heat up (Tom's recorded 107°C) the cards PCB starts acting as an heatsink which begins heating up the other components (memory IC's, power plugs and cabling. In a reasonably intensive gaming session, these temperatures will start adversely affecting the cards operation if the airflow isn't sufficient to remove heat from the centre section of the card where the voltage regulation sits.
Actually I prefer playing game with Anti-aliasing on. The game looks much more beautiful on MSAA 8x. I've been checking reviews of alot of GPUs and even GTX 980(45fps) and R9 290X(35fps) fail to provide 60fps in GTA 5 with MSAA 8x on 1080p. So I thought GTX 980 Ti might be able to do that. But there are no 1080p benchmarks.
