12 ms·
Nvidia Announces Titan Xp Graphics Card
- bryanlarsen 9y agoA few more details: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-titan-xp-graphics-card-gp102,34079.html http://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-titan-xp-graphics-ca...
- hatsunearu 9y agoDamn, the 2016 Titan X was confusing because the 2015 Titan X was named the same, so people nicknamed the 2016 one as Titan XP and they fucking went ahead and one-upped the confusion by making an actual Titan Xp. Bravo Nvidia LOL I had to check if my hacker news app wasn't updated with the newest post list since April Fools.
- sundvor 9y agoWell, at least it's somewhat better than the iPad. "Here's the new iPad. It's newer than the old one, but good luck trying to tell the difference. So to clear things up, we've named it the "iPad". You can thank us later.".
- jsheard 9y agoOh dear, what were they thinking with that name. First they released the Maxwell-based GTX Titan X, then replaced it with the Pascal-based Nvidia Titan X which nearly everyone called the Titan XP to disambiguate the confusingly similar names, and now Nvidia goes and uses that universally accepted nickname as an actual product name for a different product.
- jandrese 9y agoEven more confusing: In the picture the shroud is labeled "TITAN X".
- jd20 9y agoThey were probably thinking next year, they can call the new one Titan XPP. Historically, their naming conventions for GeForce cards haven't been super consistent either.
- errantspark 9y agoReally? The first number is always the major release and the second number is always the line from what I can recall? It's pretty high up there in terms of naming consistency.
- sspiff 9y agoExcept for rebranded chips/cards.
- problems 9y agoAs far as I know most of the rebranded ones will still list the Nvidia model number. Check https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?N=100007709%20601201888&IsNodeId=1&Submit=ENE https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?N=100007709%... for instance. While some have their own separate model, it's not usually what people buying the card look at.
- sspiff 9y agoI don't mean that kind of branding, I mean the kind of rebranding where for example the take the same chip that's in a GTX 680, and re-release it as a GTX 770.
- nsxwolf 9y agoThey should have gone with the great Apple/Nintendo naming convention of "The New Titan X"
- frankchn 9y agoI would have preferred the Microsoft naming convention of "Titan XP SP2"
- ReverseCold 9y agoRazer too. Makes it great for selling old laptops for the same price as the new one.
- overcast 9y agoSuper Titan X
- problems 9y agoThey should really stick with their standard naming convention and just call it a 1090 or a 1080 Titan or something - all the information is there, you know what generation it's from and you know where it stands in the product lineup. No confusing "which Titan X do you mean".
- m_mueller 9y agoNvidia has a history with names. Remember when they used "Tesla" to both call a microarchitecture and their HPC line of cards, for which it's still used? When Fermi based Tesla cards came out, everyone was saying 'huh, wait what'?
- Zaheer 9y agoHow does this compare to AMD's latest card?
- dgritsko 9y agoIt will more than likely demolish it in terms of raw performance; however, AMD's most recent cards are aimed at being more budget-friendly. An RX 480 will only set you back about $200-250 (compared with this $1200 beast of a card). You'll get more "bang for your buck" by going with an AMD card as opposed to a top-of-the-line model such as this one. That may change later this year when AMD releases their Vega architecture, as it's rumored to aim more at the high-end market (which is currently dominated by Nvidia).
- philjohn 9y agoAnd it appears that for titles using Vulkan or DX12 AMD sees a bigger uplift than NVidia cards switching to those APIs for reasons unknown.
- bryanlarsen 9y agoNVidia has a killer driver team, which gives them a huge advantage. This advantage is lessened in the "lower-level" DX12 & Vulkan API's.
- floatboth 9y agoAnd on the other hand, Graphics Core Next was initially designed for low level APIs — they actually started the whole "low level API on desktop" trend with Mantle.
- TheGuyWhoCodes 9y agoReason are unknown but there are speculation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIoZB-cnjc0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIoZB-cnjc0 This is a very good explanation/speculation which deals with the NV driver optimization for DX11 where they break up the draw calls between threads because the scheduler is software based where AMD is hardware based and can't do the same. In DX12 this isn't needed so AMD scheduler being hardware based can be better utilized.
- sxp 9y agoFor comparison, the 1080Ti is ~11.3TFLOPS + 11GB RAM @ $700 vs the Titan at ~12.1TFLOPS + 12GB RAM @ $1200. ~9% more performance for 70% more money. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_10_series#GeForce_10_.2810xx.29_series https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_10_series#GeForce_10_....
- wnevets 9y agothey don't call it the bleeding edge for nothing.
- mlvljr 9y agobleeding purse :)
- p1esk 9y agoYeah, I kinda hoped the next Titan will have decent FP16 performance...
- tanderson92 9y agoI have been evaluating buying a 1080Ti recently; it appears to also have the highest cores per $. Is the 1080Ti really then the most efficient card for general purpose HPC work on Linux (numerics)? The 1080 is a step down but also competitively priced. Curious about your thoughts, as I couldn't find a guide on this stuff on the web. edit: The Tesla K20 is also in competition in my view (despite the much higher cost) due to its focus on higher double-precision performance.
- jjuhl 9y agoAs far as performance per $ goes I actually think the gtx 1070 is the sweet spot currently.
- tanderson92 9y agoIf you're measuring cores per $ or GFLOP (single precision or double precision) per $ the ordering (decreasing) is the same: 1080 ti, 1080, 1070. Tesla wins on GFLOP (double precision) per $. At least according to current lowest newegg prices. It is all quite close though.
- samcat116 9y agoFinally we get macOS Pascal drivers. Super pumped.
- ClassyJacket 9y agoBut what Mac are you going to put it in...?
- daxelrod 9y agoThunderbolt eGPU, perhaps?
- lukealization 9y agoHackintosh?
- samcat116 9y agoYup. Got a 1050ti sitting in my machine right now. That was the only thing holding me back.
- aceperry 9y agoAnyone know what the driver situation is going to be like for linux?
- Vexs 9y agoThe mac drivers give some hope, but I doubt it will be any better than what we have already.
- Florin_Andrei 9y agoShouldn't it be supported by existing Pascal drivers already? I've the original Titan X Pascal and Tensorflow works great with some old driver version, I even forgot which.
- jamesfmilne 9y agoIt's already available http://www.nvidia.co.uk/download/driverResults.aspx/117771/en-uk http://www.nvidia.co.uk/download/driverResults.aspx/117771/e...
- rz2k 9y ago>Currently Mac users are limited to Maxwell GPUs from the company’s 9-series cards, but next week we’ll be able to finally experience Pascal, albeit a $1200 Pascal model, on the Mac. >We have reached out to Nvidia for a statement about compatibility down the line with lesser 10-series cards, and I’m happy to report that Nvidia states that all Pascal-based GPUs will be Mac-enabled via upcoming drivers. This means that you will be able to use a GTX 1080, for instance, on a Mac system via an eGPU setup, or with a Hackintosh build. https://9to5mac.com/2017/04/06/nvidia-titan-xp-beta-pascal-drivers-mac/ https://9to5mac.com/2017/04/06/nvidia-titan-xp-beta-pascal-d...
- eliperkins 9y agoThis is great. Hackintosh builds using the GTX 1080 will be fairly powerful now.
- gogopuppygogo 9y agoI wish Apple would pay attention to the pro users out there who still want a workstation. *Still rocking a Mid 2010 Mac Pro since the 2013 model was underwhelming and nothing has been released since.
- alfredxing 9y agoJust a couple of days ago, Apple held a small press meeting discussing the Mac Pro: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14031619 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14031619
- jacurtis 9y agoIt makes you wonder if this isn't a coincidence. Nvidia and Mac have pretended like the other one doesn't exist for several years now (since Apple adopted AMD and dropped NVIDIA about 4 years ago). Now, less than a week apart Apple breaks its iron curtain randomly to come out and tell us that they are making better Mac Pros and promises that they actually listen to customer feedback and NVIDIA announces mac support coming to their high end GPUs. Its a bit too crazy of a coincidence for me. Once of the biggest requests from Mac Pro users was the ability to at least have the option to use NVIDIA cards. I had a Macbook pro (2013 i think) which had a dedicated NVIDIA graphics card in it, and then i upgraded to a 2015 model Macbook pro with the same specs (100% decked out) and noticed a huge drop in graphics performence due to the fact that I was stuck with the AMD graphics card (as Apple had dropped NVIDIA as their dedicated graphics card provider during those years). I really regretted upgrading my Mac and wish i could have my older one back which had the NVIDIA card.
- bitL 9y agoIs there something in Titan XP I would benefit from for ML/DL/AI comparing to 1080Ti (except for extra 1GB)? I am considering getting 8c Ryzen with 1080Ti (1-2x) and am wondering if Titan XP has something that would render 1080Ti obsolete for training models?
- jsheard 9y agoIn terms of architecture and features the 1080ti and Titan Xp are the same, the only difference is the Titan Xp is slightly faster and has 1GB extra VRAM. If your workload can be efficiently split between multiple cards then a $1400 pair of 1080tis will vastly outperform a $1200 Titan Xp - 16% more money for nearly double the throughput.
- bitL 9y agoGreat! That's what I wanted to know! Many thanks! I was more curious if Titans had some lower precision data type or better dataset packing than vanilla Pascals, or something similar that would help with ML.
- Nexxxeh 9y agoAnother poster said that the drivers will prevent you running more than two 1080Ti's properly in the same machine (if I interpret it correctly). In case you are just checking on your comment thread, do check the other threads as there's interesting performance comparisons being discussed.
- samstave 9y agojust a meta showerthought; I was about to ask "What is it we expect from GPU companies in the next ten years? Why/how will they dominate computing/innovate in ways that we care/compute?" you answered my question. I think now is the time to invest in Nvidia and any other GPU manufacturer as the ML/DL/AI field is on the precipice to explode computing in the next 15 years. (15 years happens much faster than you might think)
- 9y ago
- superrad 9y agoIs there any point (for games) in having that much memory when you can really only address about 9 GB a frame at 60Hz (Titan Xp is 550GB/s)? I mean its certainly better than the Titan X (Maxwell) which could only address less than half it's memory while running at 60Hz. It just seems like an effort to inflate the price of the product without adding much value.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- Florin_Andrei 9y agoThe Titan X was never intended exclusively for gamers. Do not forget that Nvidia is also emphasizing its AI-related products.
- Fomite 9y agoThis. The Titan-line makes more sense if, in addition to viewing it as the top end of their gaming line, you view it as the bottom-end(ish) of their compute line.
- jo909 9y agoSorry I might not understand what you are saying. You're in the game and look at a house, then you turn around an look at a tree, so you need the geometry and texture of the tree, but no longer of the house. Then you look down and a chicken walks into frame, so you now need that, you kill the chicken and suddenly need the dying chicken animation etc. Almost never you need all data for a single frame. That would be way too much work for the render pipeline anyway.
- stonemetal 9y agoHe is saying a video game running at 60 Hz has approx 16 ms per frame. 550 GB/s * 16 ms ~ 9 GB. So if you are running full bandwidth for an entire frame you can access 9 GB of RAM.
- 9y ago
- alkoumpa 9y agonot sure why anyone would spend double money when you can get about the same performance using a gtx 1080 TI. The performance looks marginal IMO -- optimizing the code on gtx 1080 TI (cuda and/or shader assembly) would probably yield very satisfactory results and definitely better perf/buck.
- Nexxxeh 9y ago"double precision performance" and "industrial-grade drivers" are two reasons. I think it depends on what exactly you are doing.
- popopobobobo 9y agoWhen will the price of this drop to below $300? 1200 for a graphic card is a little too much for me.
- princeb 9y agoprobably won't ever get this for $300 brand new. you might be able to find some 2013 Titans for $400.
- strictnein 9y agoThe GTX 1070 is a very powerful card and can purchased for ~$370. The GTX 1060 is also a good card if you're looking to game at 1080p (which most people still are). It can be found for around $200.
- popopobobobo 9y agoGreat, GTX 1070 should be good enough for me. And it is a pascal too.
- ornitorrincos 9y agothe 970 is a good card to play at 1089(admitedly I don't pkay a great variety) but it's fairly enough, specially considering the price
- filipncs 9y agoRegarding the new Nvidia provided mac driver, does this have any influence on Vulkan or modern OpenGL support? Or would that require changes in macOS itself (that would presumably never happen)?
- superfx 9y agoWhy not more memory? Esp. with the 1080Ti at 11GB and half the price, it would've made sense to push this to at least 16GB or even 24GB to distinguish it.
- strictnein 9y agoThe problem is that they also need to distinguish it from the higher memory and much more expensive Quadro line. For instance, the new Quadro P6000 comes with 24GB and it'll run you $5500. https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814133636 https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E1681413... If you're doing memory intensive stuff, NVIDIA wants you to spend a whole lot more.
- superfx 9y agoYeah I can see that, but they're running into the other problem now where 12GB is just not that much more than 11GB and certainly not worth the 100% price increase. At 16GB they would at least be offering ~50% more memory.
- ww520 9y agoWow. These graph cards have more memory than my machine.
- killjoywashere 9y agoDear Apple: please give us a Cheesegrater Mac Pro with room for 4 of these.
- intoverflow2 9y agoThink it's time to face facts that Apple doesn't care about you, me or any other people who need this power. (Will believe the new Mac Pro when I see it, but It's likely to have AMD cards)