NVIDIA’s GeForce GTX Titan Review, Part 2: Titan's Performance Unveiled
by Ryan Smith & Rahul Garg on February 21, 2013 9:00 AM ESTCrysis: Warhead
Up next is our legacy title for 2013, Crysis: Warhead. The stand-alone expansion to 2007’s Crysis, at over 4 years old Crysis: Warhead can still beat most systems down. Crysis was intended to be future-looking as far as performance and visual quality goes, and it has clearly achieved that. We’ve only finally reached the point where single-GPU cards have come out that can hit 60fps at 1920 with 4xAA.
At 2560 we still have a bit of a distance to go before any single-GPU card can crack 60fps. In lieu of that Titan is the winner as expected. Leading the GTX 680 by 54%, this is Titan’s single biggest win over its predecessor, actually exceeding the theoretical performance advantage based on the increase in functional units alone. For some reason GTX 680 never did gain much in the way of performance here versus the GTX 580, and while it’s hard to argue that Titan has reversed that, it has at least corrected some of the problem in order to push more than 50% out.
In the meantime, with GTX 680’s languid performance, this has been a game the latest Radeon cards have regularly cleared. For whatever reason they’re a good match for Crysis, meaning even with all its brawn, Titan can only clear the 7970GE by 21%.
On the other hand, our multi-GPU cards are a mixed bag. Once more Titan loses to both, but the GTX 690 only leads by 15% thanks to GK104’s aforementioned weak Crysis performance. Meanwhile the 7990 takes a larger lead at 33%.
I’d also note that we’ve thrown in a “bonus round” here just to see when Crysis will be playable at 1080p with its highest settings and with 4x SSAA for that picture-perfect experience. As it stands AMD multi-GPU cards can already cross 60fps, but for everything else we’re probably a generation off yet before Crysis is completely and utterly conquered.
Moving on, we once again have minimum framerates for Crysis.
When it comes to Titan, the relative improvement in minimum framerates over GTX 680 is nothing short of obscene. Whatever it was that was holding back GTX 680 is clearly having a hard time slowing down Titan, leading to Titan offering 71% better minimum framerates. There’s clearly much more going on here than just an increase in function units.
Meanwhile, though Titan’s gains here over the 7970GE aren’t quite as high as they were with the GTX 680, the lead over the 7970GE still grows a bit to 26%. As for our mutli-GPU cards, this appears to be a case where SLI is struggling; the GTX 690 is barely faster than Titan here. Though at 31% faster than Titan, the 7990 doesn’t seem to be faltering much.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
337 Comments
View All Comments
CeriseCogburn - Tuesday, February 26, 2013 - link
Yes, and this is the core situation the radical chizow and others like him have chosen to completely ignore.Ivy is 22nm and only 14nm now appears to be possible as approx. 30 atoms are channel widths, with electromigration/plasma leakage hits a critical stage.
So the slowdown has already occurred, Moore's law is broken (decelleration has been occurring for a long time) , and the reality is near present with the "largest possible" die at Titan's node.
The number of atoms across in the "electric wire channel" and insulator sides width is down to countable on fingers and toes and it appears there's nearly no place to go.
That's why we keep hearing about quantum computing dreams, and why shrinkage steps have been less beneficial toward this wall.
So, expect the crybabies to be taking up a few notches more into an ever higher pitch the next couple of releases. It's coming, or rather it's here.
vanwazltoff - Friday, February 22, 2013 - link
the 690, 680 and 7970 have had almost a year to brew and improve with driver updates, i suspect that after a few drivers and an overclock titan will creep up on a 690 and will probably see a price deduction after a few months. dont clock out yet, just think what this could mean for 700 and 800 series cards, its obvious nvidia can deliverinitialised - Friday, February 22, 2013 - link
When are you guys going to start posting 4K performance for high end graphics?iceman-sven - Friday, February 22, 2013 - link
I am also wondering. Anandtech need to buy the Sharp PN-K321 fast. I will upgrade from my 2560x1600 to 4k in the next 12 months.I hope Anandtech does a rerun of some benchmarks with 4k and Titan SLI configurations. I am planning to buy 2 Titan for this.
Ryan Smith - Monday, February 25, 2013 - link
When someone releases a suitable desktop monitor and we can acquire it on a long-term basis. Something like Sharp's 32-incher is the right resolution, but it really pushes the boundary for what can be called a "desktop" monitor.ElminsterTCOM - Friday, February 22, 2013 - link
I was wondering if you could pop this card into a Mac Pro and let us know if it is compatible? This would be a great card for 3D modeling!Saxie81 - Friday, February 22, 2013 - link
I'm wondering why the other websites that give reviews, benchmarks etc, have missed the mark with this card. Everywhere I look, they are posting nothing but game benchmarks, this is why I keep coming to Anandtech. This clearly is meant for more than that. I'm looking @ it for gaming and 3d rendering. I would have loved to have seen maybe Rendering times on a simple image in Blender etc, but the compute benchmarks gives a pretty good indication of what the Titan is capable of. Great article as always, Ryan, and welcome Rahul!Zoeff - Friday, February 22, 2013 - link
Looking at the Crysis 1080p at highest settings benchmark. I guess they're the wrong way around? :)Ryan Smith - Monday, February 25, 2013 - link
Do'h. Fixed.realneil - Friday, February 22, 2013 - link
Seems like whenever `anyone` releases the ~newest/best~ video card, they always price it at a grand. So this isn't surprising to me at all. How much were the Matrix cards from ASUS when they were new?I just can't see spending that much for it though. A pair of 680s or 7970s would get the job done for me.