290°

GTX Titan Production Might Be Ceased – Nvidias Epic Fail

HardwarePal : All the data collected on the GTX 780Ti only points that it’s going to be faster than Nvidia’s previous top dog the GTX Titan. Now we know that the GTX 780 Ti will cost $699 and if not better than the GTX Titan, it’s going to be on par with it for $300 less.

Read Full Story >>
hardwarepal.com
Software_Lover3836d ago

They didn't fail, they just made a fool, and some money, out of a few people.

Dante813836d ago

Nvidia offer some great features like physex, n-sync, hemi cuda cores. Also, they have great drivers--that's why they always win at F1.

Lior3836d ago

I have 780 SLI which kick the crap out of every game

ATiElite3835d ago (Edited 3835d ago )

@ Software _Lover

Bubbles+ well said

My HD7970GE CFX set-up DESTROYS Titan and was $300 cheaper.

Ares84HU3836d ago

$699 just for a video card wow..... how is PC gaming cheaper again??

Deividas3836d ago (Edited 3836d ago )

The games. In the long run, Console gamers tend to spend more money on games (A much higher price per game) which adds up quickly while Steam has some of the best deals you can find and get in a week get a brand new game for like $30-40. All the time. And a GTX 780ti will be owned by a few % of the PC Community, most dont have a $700 card, more like a $200-300 on average.

Ares84HU3836d ago

You guys have a point there I give you that but still this is an expensive card.

I used to game on PC in my teens and I always wanted the best and the latest. It wasn't cheap for me.

If I'd get into PC gaming again I would want the best again and it would be very costly.

Unfortunately I only have time for one system and for now it'll be the PS4.

turgore3836d ago

Not with PS+ around, but yes piracy is cheaper (and illegal).

cactusjack3836d ago

i hope you know games are only as a good as they are made. no graphics card in the world is going to make a character that is 25k tri's look like a character thats 1million tris.

Deividas3836d ago (Edited 3836d ago )

@turgore
Love PS+ and it is awesome, your right and I have it, but it doesnt come close to steam sales. It just doesnt. And If im not mistaken, AC Black Flag and Call of Duty Ghost have both been pirated like no tomorrow on consoles in the last week. Its prominent on all platforms.

@cactusiack
No one is talking about graphics quality here, get out (-Bubble, off-topic on this particular conversation). We are talking on games being cheaper so stop trying to start a flame war here.

ssj273836d ago (Edited 3836d ago )

like you can't get cheap prices on PS3 games?
I guess I did not got Farcry 3 for $30 two weeks after release date.. it was all a dream.

It was only the first year or two when current gen start, that we did not have amazing deals..

but even next gen you could get two PS4 games and get "one free" from the start.

stop acting like steam deals are the best and only ones that offer good deals.. looks at gamefly deals for example, they have super cheap games there, craiglist, etc etc.. plus i could sale the game and reover the whole amount i invest if i'm smart.

there is also gamestop,, buy a used game, finished and return it, all for free!!! you can't do that on PC an you? and piracy is also possible on consoles if you are going to say you an by piracy.

check mate... akuna matata...boooom!!! shakalakalaka

Razputin3836d ago

You don't have to upgrade every damn time something new comes out.

Learn to stretch what you have.

I have an 1st gen i7 build.

i7 960 @3.33GHz (STOCK)
12GB DDR3 @1600Mhz
GTX 295

All I've done in the past 4 years since I had it was upgrade the graphics card once from a friend, he gave me a 5970, and once myself last year buying myself a GTX670 FTW.

All I've done was over clock my CPU to 3.8GHz, kept the RAM, new GPU(mainly for DX11 and better features). And an SSD 256GB bought it for $200 almost 2 years ago.

You don't need to upgrade every little thing every time something new comes out. Just go all out the first time and you are set.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3836d ago
Software_Lover3836d ago

That is the top tier card. Great cards run about 300-500 as we can see with the 280x, 290x, gtx 780. Plus with the 500 card you get 3 free games ($180 value), plus games are cheaper on pc.

So we have........

ps4 400.00
Batman, AssCreed IV, Splinter Cell - 180.00
total 580.00 (plus 60.00 for new games)

upgrade pc gpu 500.00
Batman, AssCreed, Splinter Cell - free
total 500.00 (plus pc games are cheaper)

SP3333D-O3836d ago

or even better...
factory overclocked GTX 770 for $330 with free Batman, AC, and Splinter Cell.

Still not cheap, but an excellent value for huge performance.

Shake_Zula3836d ago (Edited 3836d ago )

I'd chalk it up to be an issue of overall tech-experience. The fact of the matter is that consoles turn on and go with the manufacturers doing the "IT" management. A gaming PC requires extra knowledge on how to configure the extra things.

Most people don't realize that Plug-n-Play exists that makes configuration simple on a basic level. It's a knowledge/effort barrier, not a cost-related one. It's sort of like the whole Android vs iPhone debate. You want simple, easy to use, go for iPhone which typically will cost more in the long run; if more raw power and customizability is wanted at the expense of ease of use, Android is the way to go. PC gamers fall into the latter category.

Me? I do both as some games obviously play better on a console versus PC and vice versa. I'd play CoD on a console because it more fun that way, as opposed to BF4 which is more fun on a PC. Just my opinion.

Pintheshadows3836d ago

That is what U am rocking SP3333D-O and it is damn impressive in its power. Arkham Origins looks very pretty on it as does Metro LL.

escott0133836d ago

You act like GPUs are the only component in PC gaming.
I game on every platform, which is fortunate, including PC.
If you get a $500 graphics card, it's impossible to even put it to good use without a CPU that won't bottleneck it. Which, a CPU that won't bottleneck that kind of a graphics card would surely cost upwards of $250-$300 at the very least.
The people that are buying those graphics cards are most likely buying equally priced CPUs and also at least $150 on RAM. Then they want a good keyboard and mouse, and a good monitor that'll make the graphics card worth it in the first place.
$800 and up for a pretty decent machine. (;
And thats without paying for games.

Software_Lover3836d ago (Edited 3836d ago )

@ Escott.........

People are so quick to respond in anger without looking at everything.

I specifically said upgrade. Not rebuild an entire PC.

An i5 2500k from 2 gens ago is still a great CPU to game with.

I could have easliy used the 300.00 gpus as a starting point but chose the more expensive 500.00 gpu to make it fair. We are talking about 1920x1080 here, so the 500.00 gpu's aren't even needed for that. You could use the 300.00 and still get better performance than the consoles.

I agree that building an entire PC from scratch will cost more up front, I can't deny that.

Pc games still cost less, as a whole.

Mini05103835d ago

probably a $300 GPU would be sufficient

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3835d ago
decrypt3836d ago

Account for all the games you bought last gen and are rendered unplayable on your next box. Unless you keep rebuying the old box whenever it fails.

Consoles have too many hidden costs. Buying a 700usd PC gpu is the absolute top end. You cant compare a ferrari to a kia same way you cant compare a 700usd gpu to the ones present in the consoles. Its an invalid comparison. Compare a 200usd GPU to the ones in the consoles and the 200usd GPU will come out on top.

As for being expensive its console gaming that:

charges to go online,
costs more per game,
lacks discounts such as the ones found on gmg or steam,
doesnt support mods in favor of DLC.

kneon3836d ago

PS+ offers discounts that often rival even Steam, plus there are all the free games thrown in.

joe903836d ago

kneon.... You are paying a yearly subscription for them deals.

"PS+ offers discounts that often rival even Steam"

NO.

Cernunnos3836d ago

And with that card you will run any game this generation at 1440p, at much higher graphic settings and framerate than any of the consoles will do.

ExitToExisT3836d ago (Edited 3836d ago )

I bought GTX 670 for $400 last year.
Right now i'm playing Battlefield 4 @ 1080p+ 40-60 fps, ultra settings on a hdtv with a x360 gamepad.

edit: yeah i use x360 gamepad for SP. At MP i will switch to mouse+keyboard.

Software_Lover3836d ago

Do you plan on getting the X1 controller for the pc? I'm not getting a console right away but I'm very interested in using the new controllers.

Deividas3836d ago

With a X360 controller? Really....not for online I hope....lol But if so, thats impressive

turgore3836d ago (Edited 3836d ago )

How does it feel to know that the PS4 always play it at 60fps ?

Yes, its 900p but whatever.

Cernunnos3836d ago

@turgore

Pretty bad tbh, running BF4 at 1440p with 60fps right now. That's 150% more pixels than 900p, and it looks amazing. When 1440p 120hz monitors release I will get one of those, and run at 1440p with >60fps

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3836d ago
thezeldadoth3836d ago

it also doubles as a gaming machine and a really nice and fast PC for everyday use. throw in a cheap blu-ray drive and have a nice blu-ray player as well.

Dante813836d ago (Edited 3836d ago )

If you're smart you buy upper mid-range. High-end cards lose their value faster than a new car getting off the lot.

kingduqc3836d ago

You don't have to get a 700$ gpu.

a 7950 will outdo the ps4 in 7 years for the cost of 199$

you pay much much more for games
you pay for online services

it all add up, I've saved over 2000$ the past 4 years vs buying games on console so even if the rig cost 3 times the price I still save money, but that's basic math and you don't understand it.

Allsystemgamer3836d ago

Those are enthusiast cards. U don't need them to play games at 1080p 60fps

A $200 OC card will do that

Kenshin_BATT0USAI3836d ago (Edited 3836d ago )

Most people don't get enthusiasts cards firstly. Don't assume everyone has some absurd overclocked cpu with 4 titans in sli. That would just be silly to have xD

The average decent card that'll give you better performance than next gen consoles are around the $200 range.

That aside, remember computers can multitask. Can't imagine the PS4 or Xbox 1 letting me edit photos, or check multiple different forums at once comfortably etc.

Lior3836d ago

If a racer wants to go faster with his car he needs to buy the parts for them

RIP_Cell3836d ago (Edited 3836d ago )

this is the top of the line video card easily several times more powerful than ps4, you won't be limited to just 1080p with it. to play games in only 1080p 60 fps like ps4 you only need a $150 card

Ares84HU3836d ago

What I'm wondering is though.....you would need a damn expensive monitor to display something above 1080p won't you?? Something like a 4K monitor or TV??

duplissi3836d ago

Who is holding your hand to force you to buy the top tier stuff? a 200 dollar gpu will surpass consoles.

ninjahunter3835d ago

Considering that a $150 graphics cards has been shown to outperform a PS4 and Xbone...

+ Show (12) more repliesLast reply 3835d ago
Revvin3836d ago

I seem to recall a review of MSI's 780 Lightning card that had better benchmarks than the Titan. For what you got performance wise over other cards the Titan was only worth it for bragging rights.

Magicite3836d ago

Also Palit Jetstream and EVGA Superclocked kills Titan on the spot.

Pintheshadows3836d ago

You are right. This has been known for a while I thought.

Nerdmaster3836d ago

OMG! So after some months Nvidia managed to make technology better and cheaper? Bastards! Epic fail indeed! /s

Show all comments (56)
330°

Nvidia DLSS 3.7 drives a further nail in the coffin of native performance

Nvidia DLSS 3.7 is the latest update to the long-running AI upscaling technology, and it further shows native performance doesn't matter.

DustMan23d ago

I think hardware development is at a point where they need to figure out how to draw less power, These beefy high end cards eat wattage, and I'm curious if using DLSS & AI in general will lower the power draw. It would seem like the days of just adding more VRAM & horsepower is over. Law of diminishing returns. Pretty soon DLSS/FSR will be incorporated into everything, and eventually the tech will be good enough to hardly notice a difference if at all. AI is the future and it would be foolish to turn around and not incorporate it at all. Reliance on AI is only going to pick up more & more.

Tapani22d ago (Edited 22d ago )

DLSS certainly lowers power consumption. Also, the numbers such as the 4090 at 450W does not tell you everything, most of the time the GPU stays between 200-350W in gameplay, which is not too different from the highest end GPU of 10 years ago. Plus, today you can undervolt + OC GPUs by a good margin to keep stock performance while utilizing 80% of the power limit.

You can make the 4090 extremely power efficient and keep 90% of its performance at 320W.

However, in today's world the chip manufacturing is limited by physics and we will have power increases in the next 5-10 years at the very least to keep the technology moving forward at a pace that satisfies both businesses and consumers.

Maybe in 10 years we have new tech coming to the markets which we are yet to invent or perhaps we can solve existing technologies problems with manufacturing or cost of production.

On the other hand, if we were to solve the energy problem on earth by utilizing fusion and solar etc. it would not matter how much these chips require. That being said, in the next 30-40 years that is a pipedream.

MrBaskerville22d ago

I don't think fusion is the way forward. It will mosy likely be too late when it's finally ready, meaning it will probably never be ready. Something else might arrive before though and then it becomes viable.

Firebird36022d ago

We need to stop the smear campaign on nuclear energy.
We could power everything forever if we wanted too.

Tacoboto23d ago

PS4 Pro had dedicated hardware in it for supporting checkerboard rendering that was used significantly in PS4 first party titles, so you don't need to look to PC or even modern PC gaming. The first RTX cards released nearly 6 years ago, so how many nails does this coffin need?

InUrFoxHole23d ago

Well... its a coffin man. So atleast 4?

Tacoboto23d ago

PSSR in the fall can assume that role.

anast22d ago

and those nails need to be replaced annually

Einhander197223d ago

I'm not sure what the point you're trying to make is, but PS4 Pro was before DLSS and FSR, and it still provides one of the highest performance uplifts while maintaining good image quality.

DLSS is it's own thing but checkerboarding om PS5 still is a rival to the likes of FSR2.

Tacoboto23d ago

Um. That is my point. That there have been so many nails in this "native performance" coffin and they've been getting hammered in for years, even on PS4 Pro before DLSS was even a thing.

RaidenBlack22d ago

Don't know what's OP's point is either but ... checkerboard rendering was good enough for its time but in terms of image quality its wayy behind what's DLSS 3 or FSR 3 is currently offering.
The main point of the article and what OP missed here is that DLSS 3.7 is soo good that its nearly undisguisable from native rendering and basically throws the "its still blurry and inferior to native rendering" debacle, (that's been going around in PC community since 2019), right out of the window.

Einhander197222d ago

RaidenBlack

DLSS is as i said a different thing from FSR and checkerboard.

But you're talking about FSR 3 which probably is better than checkerboard, but FSR 3 has only started to get games this year, so checkerboard which was the first hardware upscaling solution was and is still one of the best upscaling solutions.

Give credit where credit is due, PlayStation was first and they got it right from the get go, and PSSR will almost certainly be better than it will be given credit for, heck digital foundry is already spreading misinformation about the Pro.

Rhythmattic22d ago

Tacoboto
Yes... Its amazing how many talekd about KZ2 deferred rendering, pointing out the explosions were lower res than the frame itself..
And of course, Then the idea of checkerboard rendering, not being native....
For sure, maybe this tech makes it minimal while pixel counting, but alas, seems performance and close enough , and not native now matters.....
I want to see it run native without DLSS.. why not?

RonsonPL23d ago

Almost deaf person:
- lightweight portable 5$, speakers of 0,5cm diameter are the final nail in coffin of Hi-Fi audio!

Some people in 2010:
- smartphones are the final nain in the console gaming's coffin!

This is just the same.
AI upscalling is complete dogshit in terms of motion quality. The fact that someone is not aware of it (look at the deaf guy example) doesn't mean the flaws are not there. They are. And all it takes to see them, is to use a display that handles motion well, so either gets true 500fps at 500Hz LCD TN or OLED (or faster tech) or uses low persistence mode (check blurbusters.com if you don't know what it means) also known as Black Frame Insertion or backlight strobing.

Also, image ruined by any type of TAA is just as "native image" as chineese 0,5$ screwdriver is "high quality, heavy duty, for professional use". It's nowhere near it. But if you're an ignorant "journalist", you will publish crap like this article, just to flow with the current.

There's no coffin to native res quality and there never will be. Eventually, we'll have enough performance in rasterization to drive 500fps, which will be a game changer for motion quality while also adding other benefit - lower latency.
And at 500fps, the amount of time required for upscalling makes it completely useless.
This crap is only usable for cinematic stuff, like cutscenes and such. Not for gaming. Beware of ignorants on the internet. The TAA is not "native" and the shitty look of the modern games when you disable any TAA, is not "native" either as it's ruined by the developer's design choice - you can cheat by rendering every 4th pixel when you plan to put a smeary TAA pass on it later on. When you disable it, you will see a ruined image, horrible pixellation and other visual "glitches" but it is NOT what native would've looked like if you'd like to honestly compare the two.

Stay informed.

RaidenBlack22d ago

Main point of the article is how far DLSS has come with v3.7 since 2018. If this is what we're getting already, then imagine what we'll get within next ~3 years. Yes parity will obviously be there compared to the then native rendering tech but it'll slowly narrow down to the point it'll be indistinguishable.
Something similar is like the genAI Sora ... AI generative videos were turd back when they were introduced (the infamous Will Smith eating video) ... but now look at Sora, generating videos that just looks like real life.

RonsonPL3d ago

You can improve quality but you will never be able to reach native quality in motion. The biggest part of why these upscallers are so praised is because they use previous frame data. You cannot do that without degrading latency and/or hurting the motion quality. If you put another flaw on top of it, coming from sample and hold method of displaying image, or coming from low framerate, sure, the difference between "screwed up image" vs. "image screwed up even more" may seem small or non-existent. But if you talk about gaming, not interactive movies, the upscallers are overhyped and harfmul tech for the gamers and the whole gaming industry. For example, a game designed around screwed up motion, like the TAA enabled games, will never be played with improved quality even 100 years later when hardware allows for native 16K res. The motion quality will be broken and even if you disable the AA pass, you will still get the broken image, cause the devs were designing their effects with smeary filter in mind - this is why you can disable TAA in some games today, manually, with some tinkering, but you get 1 to 16 understampled crap.
It's annoying that nobody seems to understand the serious drawbacks of AI assisted upscallers. Everyone just praises it and calling it a great revolution. Don't get me wrong. AI has its place in rendering. But NOT in gaming.

22d ago
Yui_Suzumiya22d ago

How much VRAM is standard today? My laptop has a 1080p QLED display but only an Intel Iris Xe with 128MB of VRAM. I currently do all my gaming on it but certain titles do suffer because of it. I plan on getting a Steam Deck OLED soon to play the newer and more demanding titles.

purple10122d ago

Maybe better to get a budget gaming laptop and link a dualsense to it

= Portable console with far better graphics than a steam deck! + bigger screen and able to use it for work / etc

170°

Why I'm worried about the Nvidia RTX 50 series

Aleksha writes: "Nvidia has established itself as a dominant force in the world of AI, but I can't shake the worry of what this means for the RTX 50 series."

Tal16926d ago

Echo sentiment here - I think the way GPUs are going, gaming could be secondary to deep learning. Wonder if the 40 series was the last true generation of GPUs?

Number1TailzFan26d ago

No.. Jensen believes GPUs should stay expensive. Those wanting a top end GPU will have to splash out for it, or play at just 1080p and 60fps or something if you can only afford a low end option.

On the other hand if you don't care about RT or AI performance then there's always AMD that are doing ok at the mid range.

Christopher25d ago

***or play at just 1080p and 60fps or something***

My over 2-year-old laptop GPU still runs fine. I think this is more a reason why GPUs are going to other things in priority, because the market reach for new users is shrinking as more PC gamers focus less on replacing older and still working parts that run RT/AI fine enough as it is. Not to say there aren't people who still do it, but I think the market is shrinking for having the latest and greatest like it has been the past two decades. Problem is we aren't growing things at a rate as we were, we're reaching the the flattening of that exponential curve in regards to advancement. We need another major technological advancement to restart that curve.

D0nkeyBoi26d ago

The irremoval ad makes it impossible to read article

Tzuno25d ago (Edited 25d ago )

I hope Intel takes some lead and do a big dent to nvidia sales

Jingsing25d ago

You also need to consider that NVIDIA are heavily invested in cloud gaming. So they are likely going to make moves to push you into yet another life subscription service.

Kayser8125d ago

NVIDIA will never change their price point until AMD or intel makes a GPU that is comparable and cheaper than them .
it happend before in the days of gtx280 which they changed the price from 650$ to 450$ in a matter of 2 weeks because of rx4870 which is being sold at 380$.

Show all comments (8)
230°

Nvidia AI Demo Unwittingly Proves that Human Voice Actors, Artists, and Writers are Irreplaceable

Nvidia presented Covert Protocol, a tech demo aiming to showcase the "power" of the Nvidia Ace technology applied to video game characters.

Read Full Story >>
techraptor.net
Eonjay46d ago (Edited 46d ago )

They look like they are in pain. Almost begging to be put down. It was uncomfortable to watch.

PRIMORDUS46d ago

The tech. is too early. Come back in 10+yrs and see what it can do then.

N3mzor46d ago

That presentation sounds like it was written by an AI using corporate buzzwords.

CS746d ago

I don’t know why people keep thinking of it as AI vs no AI.

A much more likely scenario is the use of AI alongside human work.

Eg. AI voices used during side quests or banter to boost the lines of dialog.

AI generating additional pre determined branches in dialog tree options for more freedom in conversations with NPCs

Smellsforfree45d ago

"AI generating additional pre determined branches in dialog tree options for more freedom in conversations with NPCs"

I'm wondering about that last one. Will that make a game more fun or more immersive? In the end, how can it possibly be more than filler content and then if it is filler content how much do I really want to engage with conversing with it if I know it will lead no where?

MrBaskerville45d ago

It's one of those things that sounds cool on paper. But will probably get old fast.

DivineHand12545d ago

The tech is now available, and it is up to creators to create something unique with it.

Profchaos46d ago (Edited 46d ago )

The biggest thing to talk about here is that every interaction requires communication to inworld servers so there's three big impacts here
1) games are always online no question about it
2) delays in processing on inworld servers, outages or unexpected load as a result of some astronomically popular game will cause real time game delays ever wait for a chat got response this will be similar as the context must be pulled via the llm.

Now as for the other impact the artistic one no I don't think writers can be replaced I've mentioned before often AI generated writing is word soup I still standby that it's also evident in the video to.
AI can not convery accurately human emotions and I don't think ever will.

I know publishers are looking to cut down on development costs but what happens when inworld decide to charge per interaction or update their pricing a year after your game goes live you have no choice but pay it or shutter it.

Ive felt for a while that we are heading towards this place of games being disposable entertainment and now it's feeling more and more accurate

Show all comments (23)