Can you fix the Boost Clock value for the ACX in the table on the first page? It doesn't match the narrative and the current value in the table does not make logical sense.
Silverstone "FT03-MINI" is very small. Does it make sense to use this card instead of the stock cooler that blows air out of the case? I really like the look of the case, and it seems the most exciting case for me right now.
You'd want to use a blower-style cooler in either the FT03 or FT03-Mini. There isn't an exhaust fan to pull out all the heat an open-air cooler produced. I have trouble cooling my passive-cooled 7750 on my FT03-mini because of this.
At $660 only a fool would buy this instead of Galaxy's HOF edition GTX 780 which is $690. What Galaxy did with that card is nothing short of astounding and a complete departure from practically anything they've released thus far. The HOF card can easily reach 1300 MHz core clock and when pushed gets so close to a GTX 690 that only a bigger fool would choose a 690 over the HOF 780, which has none of the problems associated with multi-GPU cards and is $300 cheaper than a 690..
The GTX Titan cannot, I repeat CANNOT, beat the HOF 780's stock settings in ANY game benchmark, unlike this EVGA ACX card which lost against the Titan in more than one benchmark.
Seriously, Anandtech, if you ever get the chance to review this card, do it. There is no faster single GPU card for gaming on the planet, and I'm betting AMD's Hawaii flagship will have a tough battle ahead.
The ACX has enough headroom to also be pushed further than a GTX Titan, and the HOF is massive, making it incredibly difficult, if not impossible in most cases, to SLI them together.
My point was the ACX has to be pushed to beat the Titan decisively. The HOF beats the Titan out-of-the-box, and when pushed, gives the Titan an even more thorough beating. Yes the cooler is large, but it does it's job really well as the temps never exceed 75C even when the card is pulling 501W from the wall. Still, the cooler can be replaced, what's more important is the PCB design which is simply put, a work of art. So much so that I am quite surprised it was made by Galaxy given their past record of being one of the lesser card manufacturers, so it makes sense that they would not have spared any expense at this point to make a name for themselves. There's a good reason why the LN2 GPU world records were made using the HOF GTX 780, and not say, the EVGA 780 Classified.
I would trust EVGA before anyone else, also it would be nice to see how this works against Titans in SLI on surround displays 1440p / 1600p surround. This is where the titan excels.
Yeah, thanks for calling me a "fool" because I'd rather spend my money (and less of it) with a company whose service is legendary than one that, until recently, was pretty much known for competing only by making a less expensive version.
nVIDIA took a very human emotional route when naming Titan. There are only so many times within a generation you can give something an amazing name and expect respect. The fact is, the 780 with some extra clock speed can surpass it with less cost.
Let's save epic names for cards that utterly surpass the best card by double or more, eh?
Let's not forget - the ONLY logical reason to buy a Titan is for it's floating point performance. If you're not attempting to build a home supercomputer, then stick with the consumer cards.
Because you buy top of the performance with stable drivers and assured quality. If one is interested in these kind of gfx board would have just to wait for AMD to launch their new series for the price to lower a bit. For someone good solid drivers available yesterday is something that is more valuable then 5 frames more tomorrow (and support for new games next month).
it amazes me that reviewers still try to make titan out as a consumer gaming card. it's claim-to-fame is its number crunching ability (particularly FP). it's a monster!! it's not a gaming card, nor, i suspect, was it ever intended to be. i bought a 690 when they were released (OK, maybe it took me a few months to actually FIND one, but you know what i mean)....for the same price, it utterly defeats the titan to the point of rediculousness. i calculated my own numbers based on this review as well. on average, the stock 780 is 72% (performance) of the 690 for 65% of the cost - more what one would expect with their differences in arcitecture (104 vs 110). in addition to this, i also fold/crunch. as a cruncher, the 690 is STILL better than titan due to its two cores!! if any of you bought a titan (for gaming, or crunching) i just gotta ask: why? the 690 is 10-15% better in both respects. sure, i can see getting a 780 vs 690: $350 is nothing to sneeze at, and it is slightly better (7%) performance/cost ratio. but, titan? fail. (unless your one of those very few/limited folks who actually do use it for its FP operation)
Interesting. According to anandtech's own bench, the titan obliterates the 690 in compute tasks. Which is really what I expect given the 680's relatively weak compute units. So I'm not quite sure which compute benchmarks you're running to demonstrate the superiority of the 690 over the Titan...
and before anyone thinks to comment about OCing the 780 vs 690 (this being an article about an OC'ed 780) they both have about the same OCing potential - both can reach 1200 MHz without too much effort so i would say OCing is a wash between the two. that's why i did not use the numbers from the OCed version in this review (i used numbers from the stock)
What's the point of all the ventilation in the back of the card when you set the fins vertically. Airflow won't directly exhaust out the back with a wall of fins blocking it. Half the heated air is directed at the motherboard. It only really serves to let noise out. The power side of the card doesn't make as much of a difference, but the bracket side of the card should have horizontal fins. Other than that, I've always like EVGA board design and customer support. It is good that they've been trying to expand their cooler designs for the 600 and 700 series. I hope they keep trying to improve.
Comparing the above given benchmarks the 7990 is more than 20% faster in average than the 780 at 2560*1440. As of today in newegg the price is 620USD. So I will choose 20% more FPS and 20 USD less price 10 times out of 10 :)
The Titan is still incredibly relevant and important for Nvidia - for psychological reasons.
The Titan at $1000 makes this card a "good deal". When Titan came out every review had a "but the price!" as a negative. If the Titan did not exist every 780 review would have the same caveat. Instead every 780 review has a "it's a great deal on a Titan" comment.
Intel does the same thing with its $1000 -X CPUs; the 4930K is a "good deal" on a 4960X. It's a sales technique widely used across all industries because it works incredibly well.
Bottom line Nvidia isn't marketing the Titan to "prosumers" or whatever else, they're marketing it to 780 customers.
I love Nvidia graphics cards, and have historically bought their top-of-the-range card every two generations, but this time out I think they've completely lost the plot on price. I remember thinking £350 here in the UK was an outrageous price when I bought my 580, but a 780 is now £500+ and it's not even their best single-GPU gaming card. Shouldn't the price stay pretty much the same for the top card across generations (inflation-adjusted)? Plotting a graph of performance increases per generation going back many generations pretty much shows the Titan should be branded the 780. I'd be interested to see their sales figures, but I can't imagine they're selling anything like as many 780s as they did 580s. And as for Titans, niche would have to be an understatement.
I don't know how you're testing this card or perhaps you got a VERY cherry picked card, but I load @ 77C and so does a friend's card. Also, this cooler is noisy. Your review conflicts heavily with xbit labs, hardware canucks, and what I've seen on two of these cards.
I have two of these in SLI, and they're dead silent - never louder than my NH-D14 CPU cooler. Top card never goes over 70C at stock settings. Guru3d, TPU, and others corroborate the noise results. The cooler is not noisy at all.
Would anyone care to explain how those FP64 ratings work? Specifically the things like "1/3 FP32" and "1/24 FP32". Seems like gibberish to be, though I assume one is better than the other, by some amount that can be inferred by comparing the fractions?
Give the card works within its thermal limits even under boost, can you underclock or reduce the base speed to make it even quieter and cooler when not gaming, but utilise full speed when playing a game? Do the utilities let you do that?
All these cards basically have right about the same speed and frame rates. The all can overclock very close to one another. The only things that really matter are the cooling capability and the noise level. The quietest/coolest gtx 780 is either the Asus Direct CU II with the updated BIOS or the MSI Gamer N780. Going with one of these cards gives you the lowest temp to noise ratio which is really the only different things between these cards. Plus the MSI Gamer N780 is on the cheaper end of the scale.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
40 Comments
Back to Article
MrCommunistGen - Sunday, September 22, 2013 - link
Can you fix the Boost Clock value for the ACX in the table on the first page? It doesn't match the narrative and the current value in the table does not make logical sense.solien - Sunday, September 22, 2013 - link
hyyyymmrezaie - Sunday, September 22, 2013 - link
Silverstone "FT03-MINI" is very small. Does it make sense to use this card instead of the stock cooler that blows air out of the case? I really like the look of the case, and it seems the most exciting case for me right now.Samus - Sunday, September 22, 2013 - link
You'd want to use a blower-style cooler in either the FT03 or FT03-Mini. There isn't an exhaust fan to pull out all the heat an open-air cooler produced. I have trouble cooling my passive-cooled 7750 on my FT03-mini because of this.mmrezaie - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
Thanks. I will settle for a normal GTX 780 for my FT03 mini.merikafyeah - Sunday, September 22, 2013 - link
At $660 only a fool would buy this instead of Galaxy's HOF edition GTX 780 which is $690.What Galaxy did with that card is nothing short of astounding and a complete departure from practically anything they've released thus far. The HOF card can easily reach 1300 MHz core clock and when pushed gets so close to a GTX 690 that only a bigger fool would choose a 690 over the HOF 780, which has none of the problems associated with multi-GPU cards and is $300 cheaper than a 690..
The GTX Titan cannot, I repeat CANNOT, beat the HOF 780's stock settings in ANY game benchmark, unlike this EVGA ACX card which lost against the Titan in more than one benchmark.
Seriously, Anandtech, if you ever get the chance to review this card, do it. There is no faster single GPU card for gaming on the planet, and I'm betting AMD's Hawaii flagship will have a tough battle ahead.
inighthawki - Sunday, September 22, 2013 - link
The ACX has enough headroom to also be pushed further than a GTX Titan, and the HOF is massive, making it incredibly difficult, if not impossible in most cases, to SLI them together.merikafyeah - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
My point was the ACX has to be pushed to beat the Titan decisively. The HOF beats the Titan out-of-the-box, and when pushed, gives the Titan an even more thorough beating. Yes the cooler is large, but it does it's job really well as the temps never exceed 75C even when the card is pulling 501W from the wall. Still, the cooler can be replaced, what's more important is the PCB design which is simply put, a work of art. So much so that I am quite surprised it was made by Galaxy given their past record of being one of the lesser card manufacturers, so it makes sense that they would not have spared any expense at this point to make a name for themselves. There's a good reason why the LN2 GPU world records were made using the HOF GTX 780, and not say, the EVGA 780 Classified.Nfarce - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
@merikayfyeah - I'll trust EVGA's superior support and warranty any day to a few more frames with a hyper-clocked Galaxy card, thanks.DPOverLord - Monday, October 7, 2013 - link
I would trust EVGA before anyone else, also it would be nice to see how this works against Titans in SLI on surround displays 1440p / 1600p surround. This is where the titan excels.DanNeely - Sunday, September 22, 2013 - link
The HOF being a 3 slot card and being 11.5" long will keep it from fitting in a number of cases.tackle70 - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
Meh... I don't trust Galaxy's brand/customer support. If I were buying today, I'd take the EVGA Classified.Sabresiberian - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
Yeah, thanks for calling me a "fool" because I'd rather spend my money (and less of it) with a company whose service is legendary than one that, until recently, was pretty much known for competing only by making a less expensive version.Jodiuh - Tuesday, September 24, 2013 - link
The HOF cards are blowing up on OCN.Oscarcharliezulu - Friday, September 27, 2013 - link
Thx for mentioning that card, it looks amazingDMCalloway - Sunday, September 22, 2013 - link
The HD 7970 GHz used sure is quiet and cool running, and I'm currently using a Red Team card. : )piroroadkill - Sunday, September 22, 2013 - link
nVIDIA took a very human emotional route when naming Titan. There are only so many times within a generation you can give something an amazing name and expect respect. The fact is, the 780 with some extra clock speed can surpass it with less cost.Let's save epic names for cards that utterly surpass the best card by double or more, eh?
piroroadkill - Sunday, September 22, 2013 - link
Just in case you don't know what I mean, ask a lay person, what sounds more awesome: "'seven-eighty' or Titan'". Yeah.inighthawki - Sunday, September 22, 2013 - link
Except that when the Titan came out, the competition was the 680, and it did crush it by quite a margin.jtd871 - Sunday, September 22, 2013 - link
Let's not forget - the ONLY logical reason to buy a Titan is for it's floating point performance. If you're not attempting to build a home supercomputer, then stick with the consumer cards.cactusdog - Sunday, September 22, 2013 - link
Im not sure its a good time to buy a card like this, with the R9 290X coming in a couple of weeks.CiccioB - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
Because you buy top of the performance with stable drivers and assured quality.If one is interested in these kind of gfx board would have just to wait for AMD to launch their new series for the price to lower a bit.
For someone good solid drivers available yesterday is something that is more valuable then 5 frames more tomorrow (and support for new games next month).
tackle70 - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
Thanks for the review!I picked up a pair of these at launch to replace a pair of lightning 7970s... couldn't be happier with them. Ridiculously fast, cool, and quiet.
Now hopefully their price will drop by $100 or so as AMD's new cards come out and can finally offer up some competition.
bds71 - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
it amazes me that reviewers still try to make titan out as a consumer gaming card. it's claim-to-fame is its number crunching ability (particularly FP). it's a monster!! it's not a gaming card, nor, i suspect, was it ever intended to be. i bought a 690 when they were released (OK, maybe it took me a few months to actually FIND one, but you know what i mean)....for the same price, it utterly defeats the titan to the point of rediculousness. i calculated my own numbers based on this review as well. on average, the stock 780 is 72% (performance) of the 690 for 65% of the cost - more what one would expect with their differences in arcitecture (104 vs 110). in addition to this, i also fold/crunch. as a cruncher, the 690 is STILL better than titan due to its two cores!! if any of you bought a titan (for gaming, or crunching) i just gotta ask: why? the 690 is 10-15% better in both respects. sure, i can see getting a 780 vs 690: $350 is nothing to sneeze at, and it is slightly better (7%) performance/cost ratio. but, titan? fail. (unless your one of those very few/limited folks who actually do use it for its FP operation)erple2 - Tuesday, September 24, 2013 - link
Interesting. According to anandtech's own bench, the titan obliterates the 690 in compute tasks. Which is really what I expect given the 680's relatively weak compute units. So I'm not quite sure which compute benchmarks you're running to demonstrate the superiority of the 690 over the Titan...bds71 - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
and before anyone thinks to comment about OCing the 780 vs 690 (this being an article about an OC'ed 780) they both have about the same OCing potential - both can reach 1200 MHz without too much effort so i would say OCing is a wash between the two. that's why i did not use the numbers from the OCed version in this review (i used numbers from the stock)tackle70 - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
OCing is absolutely not a wash between the two on average... 780 is quite superior *on average*http://hwbot.org/hardware/videocard/geforce_gtx_69...
http://hwbot.org/hardware/videocard/geforce_gtx_78...
JPForums - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
What's the point of all the ventilation in the back of the card when you set the fins vertically. Airflow won't directly exhaust out the back with a wall of fins blocking it. Half the heated air is directed at the motherboard. It only really serves to let noise out. The power side of the card doesn't make as much of a difference, but the bracket side of the card should have horizontal fins. Other than that, I've always like EVGA board design and customer support. It is good that they've been trying to expand their cooler designs for the 600 and 700 series. I hope they keep trying to improve.alkhanzi - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
The 7990 hugely beats both the Titan and EVGA 780 in each and every of the benchmarks, and costs the same(+ the game bundle).tackle70 - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
The 7990 is, on average, a whopping 4% faster than this card at 1920x1080, and just 14% faster at 25601600...Given the heat/coil whine/driver issues that the 7990 has, I'll take the 780 ten times out of ten.
alkhanzi - Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - link
Comparing the above given benchmarks the 7990 is more than 20% faster in average than the 780 at 2560*1440. As of today in newegg the price is 620USD. So I will choose 20% more FPS and 20 USD less price 10 times out of 10 :)tackle70 - Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - link
The limited test suite here favors the 7990http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/EVGA/GTX_780_SC...
GeorgeH - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
The Titan is still incredibly relevant and important for Nvidia - for psychological reasons.The Titan at $1000 makes this card a "good deal". When Titan came out every review had a "but the price!" as a negative. If the Titan did not exist every 780 review would have the same caveat. Instead every 780 review has a "it's a great deal on a Titan" comment.
Intel does the same thing with its $1000 -X CPUs; the 4930K is a "good deal" on a 4960X. It's a sales technique widely used across all industries because it works incredibly well.
Bottom line Nvidia isn't marketing the Titan to "prosumers" or whatever else, they're marketing it to 780 customers.
colonelclaw - Tuesday, September 24, 2013 - link
I love Nvidia graphics cards, and have historically bought their top-of-the-range card every two generations, but this time out I think they've completely lost the plot on price. I remember thinking £350 here in the UK was an outrageous price when I bought my 580, but a 780 is now £500+ and it's not even their best single-GPU gaming card. Shouldn't the price stay pretty much the same for the top card across generations (inflation-adjusted)? Plotting a graph of performance increases per generation going back many generations pretty much shows the Titan should be branded the 780.I'd be interested to see their sales figures, but I can't imagine they're selling anything like as many 780s as they did 580s. And as for Titans, niche would have to be an understatement.
Jodiuh - Tuesday, September 24, 2013 - link
I don't know how you're testing this card or perhaps you got a VERY cherry picked card, but I load @ 77C and so does a friend's card. Also, this cooler is noisy. Your review conflicts heavily with xbit labs, hardware canucks, and what I've seen on two of these cards.tackle70 - Tuesday, September 24, 2013 - link
I have two of these in SLI, and they're dead silent - never louder than my NH-D14 CPU cooler. Top card never goes over 70C at stock settings. Guru3d, TPU, and others corroborate the noise results. The cooler is not noisy at all.rs2 - Tuesday, September 24, 2013 - link
Would anyone care to explain how those FP64 ratings work? Specifically the things like "1/3 FP32" and "1/24 FP32". Seems like gibberish to be, though I assume one is better than the other, by some amount that can be inferred by comparing the fractions?Oscarcharliezulu - Friday, September 27, 2013 - link
Give the card works within its thermal limits even under boost, can you underclock or reduce the base speed to make it even quieter and cooler when not gaming, but utilise full speed when playing a game? Do the utilities let you do that?jdietz - Tuesday, October 1, 2013 - link
Where do I go to see the test setup (CPU, etc...)?Laststop311 - Sunday, October 6, 2013 - link
All these cards basically have right about the same speed and frame rates. The all can overclock very close to one another. The only things that really matter are the cooling capability and the noise level. The quietest/coolest gtx 780 is either the Asus Direct CU II with the updated BIOS or the MSI Gamer N780. Going with one of these cards gives you the lowest temp to noise ratio which is really the only different things between these cards. Plus the MSI Gamer N780 is on the cheaper end of the scale.