Test of the Real Nvidia Gtx Titan, single-sli-tri Sli, 4 WAY SLI
-
Yes, more FPS or improvement in the bench scores.
-
I don't know if you've tried the Beta drivers, but at least for me the change is brutal. At stock voltage, they already exceed 1200Mhz with ease. Also, I don't know why it applies 1.20V to one and 1.18V to the other when both are at stock voltage. But anyway, with different voltage from each other, the two are currently stable at 1215Mhz. If Nvidia hits another driver home run and continues to increase its efficiency in these cards, their performance will certainly be beastly.
! The first card:
!
! The second card
!
The computer is freshly formatted, meaning the drivers are completely clean, but I can't explain why it puts different voltage in one and the other when they are both the same ASIC (well, they differ by 0.3%, so I doubt it will be noticeable). I think this suggests that the ASIC is not as important as people are saying. I think the voltage difference is perhaps because the drivers are not fully polished yet, at least for Multi-GPU configurations, and I think both will go to 1.18V. Anyway, I will try to measure it to see if they are at 1.18V or 1.20V or if each one actually has a different voltage applied.
Well, I just tried them after reading you. And yes, they allow more OC, my Gigabytes are now at 1228, the SC is at 1254... :ugly: If they keep going like this, we'll put them at 1300.................... xD.
Although I always go with the Vcore fixed at 1.21. Certainly, I expect them to stretch much more with drivers, if not in OC, the ones we are using are already very good, in performance they still have a lot to stretch...
Regards...
Yes, more FPS or improvement in the score in the benches.
In performance they have also given a boost, not a huge one, but I'm replaying Metro 2033 now, with everything maxed out without AA and DOF activated. And I was between 55 / 60 fps. Now I move about 5 fps more above. Sometimes more, sometimes less...
The images are resized to 50%, and converted to jpg, as the AB captures them in bmp, they weigh about 40 Mb... :ugly:
Regards...
-
Duplicated….
-
Trplicado….......xD.
The forum was a bit "worky" last night, sorry.
Salu2...
-
Jotole already released the enter button
Another page with a lot of information about Titan, there's even a table about ASICS and booting:
[User-Review] GTX Titan - OC, Tests, Benches, Verbrauch, Bios, Boost, Wakü Umbau - User Review
Jotole take a look here, you might be interested:
http://kingpincooling.com/forum/showthread.php?p=25162#post25162
-
Jotole lets go of the enter button
Another page with a lot of information about Titan, there's even a table about ASICS and booting:
[User-Review] GTX Titan - OC, Tests, Benches, Verbrauch, Bios, Boost, Wakü Umbau - User Review
Jotole take a look here, you might be interested:
Very interesting reading majo, I wish more reputable sites would do a review like that user's..
About the Mod, and soldering the Epower…..............:ugly: I also find it very interesting, I had seen some vol mod to a titan before....But I don't see myself doing it :ugly::ugly::ugly:
Just seeing them go over 1200, I'm satisfied..... xD. That user Xtreme Addict, comments on the hwbot forum, that he has put it at 1600 with 1,52 voltage........!!
That of putting them at 1750 Mhz, for those who are given them, I would burn them for sure............ :troll:
Thanks for the links…..... ;).
Best regards...
P.D. How much will a "monster" like this consume with an Epower?, about 500W??
-
Nvidia GTX Titan - modified VBIOS for more control and better overclocking
Nvidia GTX Titan - modified VBIOS for more control and better overclocking
If anyone wants them, send me a PM and I'll send them to you
-
Very interesting comparison of GTX 680 - GTX 690 - HD 7970 - HD 7990 - Titan - Titan SLI in 3840x2160 resolution.
Frame Rating: High End GPUs Benchmarked at 4K Resolutions | PC Perspective
-
Very interesting comparison of GTX 680 - GTX 690 - HD 7970 - HD 7990 - Titan - Titan SLI in 3840x2160 resolution.
Frame Rating: High End GPUs Benchmarked at 4K Resolutions | PC Perspective
Thanks for the link Patagonico, soon it will be more viable to get screens of that type and it's good to know what we are facing with those 4K resolutions, for now a surround of that not even look at it….......:ugly:
Salu2...
-
Hello everyone,
I have already received the Titan. An Asus. The truth is that I was already looking forward to it. The only thing that bothers me is that the box came open, therefore used. It has an ASIC of 74.8, the truth is that it is good. The store told me that there would be no problems in changing it, but it would bother me if another one arrived, new but worse.
I don't know what to do. Any opinions?
I am bothered about spending the money, so that they can send me a second-hand one, or a return one… -
Hello everyone,
I've already received my Titan. It's an Asus. To be honest, I was really looking forward to it. The only thing that bothers me is that the box came open, so it's been used. It has an ASIC of 74.8, which is actually pretty good. The store told me that there would be no problems changing it, but I would be annoyed if another one came, new but worse.
I don't know what to do. Any opinions?
I'm not keen on spending the money, only to get a second-hand one, or a return...Hello friend. Well, I can tell you what I would do. Check it out. If it looks good, plug it into your computer. If it's good, personally, I wouldn't change it with that ASIC. If that helps.
Maybe someone ordered it and returned it for a reason, like, for example, to see if it was worth the change compared to another. Or others. It doesn't have to be for something bad.
With that ASIC you'll have between 993 and 1006 boost, and, in addition, it will increase your score quite a bit.
Best regards.
-
Thanks Teeth. Today I will try to overclock it a bit, to see if it holds up well, although with the performance it has by default I already find a difference.
-
+1
It's a good ASIC, according to this table you will have 1.006 of Boost as standard:
I would try it, and if everything is fine I would keep it. With my Zotac I was also lucky and it has 78.1% of Asic, and it goes up very well.
Regards
-
Well yes, it goes to 1006. Checked a moment ago. Another thing, I have never overclocked a graphics card. Any guide you can recommend? Or if you want to give me your values pepillo, and I try them? Since they are from the same range in the table, they will probably be similar.
Best regards! -
Pues si, me va a 1006. Comprobado hace un momento. Otra cosa, no he hecho nunca overclock a una grafica. Alguna guia que me podais recomendar? o si me quieres dar tus valores pepillo, y los pruebo? al ser de la misma franja en la tabla, seguramente seran parecidas.
Un saludo!Lee esto primero:
GPU Boost 2.0 - Funcionamiento y overclock de la Geforce Titan - HardLimit
Mis valores de overclock no te servirían porque le cambié la bios.
Saludos
-
Well yes, it goes to 1006. Verified a moment ago. Another thing, I have never overclocked a graphics card. Any guide you can recommend? or if you want to give me your values pepillo, and I try them? since they are from the same range in the table, they will probably be similar.
Best regards!I agree with the colleagues, I have one with that ASIC, another with less and another with more. And it will go up to 1200 + or -, a pretty decent OC.
Raising a GPU is very similar to a CPU in the basic principles.
You need the EVGA Precision or the MSI Afterburner, a program to test, for example the Unigine 4.0, and patience.
.Always monitor the temperatures of the graphics card. Change the fan profile, remove the automatic from the OC program you use, and set it to 60%, for example. I wouldn't let it exceed 85º, do tests and if you need to increase the fan more, do it.
Increase the Core by 5 or 10, and check stability with Unigine 4.0, for example. (Any benchmark will help you get an idea if it's stable.)
Increase until the card hangs.
When it hangs, apply voltage to the core, the Titan can be increased up to +37mv. Increase by 5 at a time. And start increasing the v core again from the point where it hung without increasing voltage.
When you reach the maximum OC that the card allows, you can do the same with the memories. In the Titans, it gives much better results to increase the core than the memories, so don't worry too much about that.
When you have the maximum OC you can achieve, lower it by 10 or 15 Mhz. It doesn't mean anything in games and it's a small margin so that the card doesn't go to the limit.
Even so, it may be that you encounter a game or benchmark that is not stable with that frequency, don't worry, lower it another 10 Mhz, and enjoy it…............. ;).
It's not a guide like the ones you can find out there, but to start it's already good enough............ ;).
Best regards...
P.D. Of course read what Pepillo has indicated, to know how this card works…....... ;).
-
Thanks for the link Patagonico, it will be more viable to get hold of screens of that type right away and it's good to know what we're up against with those 4K resolutions, for now a surround of that kind I wouldn't even look at….......:ugly:
Salu2...
Logic dictates that the performance should be half of what you have now, for example Crysis 3 tests it at High resolution giving it an average of 25 fps, I tried with Ultra resolution and my average is 15 fps, FC3 in Ultra gets 20 fps and my game rejects the 3840x2160p configuration.
I don't know much about Surround maybe you can configure it by downsampling to 3840x2160 at 30Hz another configuration should fail, but logic would say that the performance should be between 10-20 fps in most cases.-
Salu2.-
-
Logic dictates that the performance should be half of what you have now, for example, I tested Crysis 3 at High resolution giving it an average of 25 fps, I tried with Ultra resolution and my average is 15 fps, FC3 at Ultra gets 20 fps and my game rejects the 3840x2160p configuration.
I don't know much about Surround, maybe you can configure it for downsampling to 3840x2160 at 30Hz, another configuration should fail, but logic would say that performance should be between 10-20 fps in most cases.
Salu2.
I would swear that much less Patagonico. Already in the jump from 5760 x 1080 to the current 7680 x 1440p, I had half the performance with the 670. In a supposed surround of 11520 x 2160p (The mother of all….:ugly:). The performance jump would be much larger. It would be a real barbarity, that current hardware wouldn't move in any way. It will lack many generations of processors and graphics, to be able to move that.
Currently I move all games in ultra, between 55/60 Metro 2033, about 50 Crysis 3
Those are the only two that I move scraping the 60 fps, the rest above 80 BF3, sleeping dogs, MoH Warfighter, and those of its class, and above 100 the ones that consume less resources or are older.
Now, if a 4k screen like that is within reach, I will definitely try it, having many inches and that resolution, must be a joy to play. Although I am in love with surround, I would give a chance to one of those....
I read your article about downsampling, maybe I'll get motivated and try it, to see how that resolution makes my pc pale....
If you tested that configuration on a single monitor and got 20 fps in a game, divide that by three, and more or less that's how it would move. Although I have more graphics power than you, I suppose I would move them in those 20 fps you mention......
It's totally unfeasible.......
Un Saludo...
-
I swear that much less Patagonico. Already in the jump from 5760 x 1080 to the current 7680 x 1440p, I had half the performance with the 670. In a hypothetical surround of 11520 x 2160p (The mother of all….:ugly:) the performance jump would be much bigger. It would be a real monstrosity, that current hardware wouldn't handle in any way. We're still many generations of processors and graphics away from being able to handle that.
Currently I run all games on ultra, between 55/60 in Metro 2033, about 50 in Crysis 3
Those are the only two that I run scraping 60 fps, the rest above 80 in BF3, Sleeping Dogs, MoH Warfighter, and those in its class, and above 100 in those that consume fewer resources or are older.
Now, if I come across one of those 4k screens, I'll definitely try it. Having many inches and that resolution must be a joy to play. Although I'm a lover of surround, I'd give one of those a try....
I read your article on downsampling, maybe I'll be inspired and try it, to see how it makes my PC pale in comparison to that resolution....
If you tested that configuration on a single monitor and got 20 fps in a game, divide that by three, and you'll roughly have an idea of how it would run. Although I have more graphics power than you, I assume I'd run them at those 20 fps you mentioned......
It's totally unfeasible.......
Best regards...
My tests always gave almost the same results in all tests, a performance loss of 40-50% when going from 1440p to 2160p, and in your case you should be close to my values since you have 3 graphics cards, although I still think these screens will be worth it starting when they achieve 60hz, which will only be in 2014, and in your case, being a lover of surround, you should get one of the curved 4k OLED screens.
Cheers.
-
duplicated …...
