Official Titan Specs leak from NV:

it mentions voltage is tied to temperature... so if you drove down temperature with water cooling could you hit even higher clock + voltage than normal stock... or is that for throttling

i dont see AMD responding to this with anything note worthy for awhile... well not a single gpu anyway ... it would be nice to see nvida pressure AMD by entering this with a lower price point unexpectedly (rumors are from 799-1199) say 699 could really create some moves for value and would put pressure on a strained AMD

shame they could not have this ready last year and put it out as the 680, as it was rumored originally it would be that 20% boost over current high-end is impressive, i wonder how it stacks against OC 7970s - mine came stock OC 1070 and OCs to 1175 on base voltage and with a little boost in voltage 1250+ ... mine is all dictated by temperature if it was water cooled or if did not mind fan noise it seems like i could take it over 1325

if it had come out 7970 level performance would be much cheaper and the 660ti might have been what a 680 is

The prospect of tri SLI for these cards makes these more appealing to me than a 690. By itself 690 isn't enough to drive 3 screens. It's no secret that 690 quad SLI doesn't scale well but tri SLI witht hese cards apears to give very impressive scaling. With these cards in tri SLI, 3D vision surround @60 fps per eye or 120 fps surround may be possible...

?I'd estimate quad doesn't scale because of CPU bottlenecks, not GPU's fault really - I'm running three 3gb GTX580's in tri-SLI and for quite a lot of stuff, games were faster with only two cards, because the added cpu cycles of running a third card impacts the cpu enough to cause the speed to actually drop below that of the 2-sli GTX580 in situations where the GPU's were running at the maximum capacity of the supporting CPU.

yeah its quite expensive but when you need performance what can you do... i am finding that massively overclocked gtx 670 sli cant power 3 display gaming without significantly lowering settings.  titan has me curious as i always wanted 120 hz monitor surround setup...but were talking about 3000 dollars after i sell my 670s and get 2 more monitors.

i wish i went with 7970s to be honest as then id just get a 3rd one. latest game benchmarks have it moping the floor with the 680 and its much more overclockable to boot...for same money as 670. 3gb vs 2gb vram also makes a difference.

ive been posting on nvidias forums for 5 years now and quad gpu has never scaled well and not because of a cpu bottleneck. its fine for synthetic benchmarks but drivers dont work properly for most games. check out some quad benchmarks on the net. some games have lower frame rates for quad sli vs 2 way sli.

The problem with that is when someone does quad SLI, they do it with high end cards, or at least pretty-damn-good ones, so the difference between performance gain from 2-way to 3-way or 4-way is much less than the jump from single to 2-way, CPU bottlenecking will always be a contributing factor, as the more GPU's you add the higher the load on the CPU just to run them, more cycles needed to support the GPUs means cpu runs slower for everything else (the game), impacting the performance - that is why synthetic benchmarks that measure the GPU alone show much better results than 'real-world' games.

Putting it bluntly, it is actually a CPU bottleneck, that's why the performance gain of high end cards beyond standard sli is not as high - take older cards and SLI them with the very latest CPU and you'll notice the scaling is much, much better than when the cards were originally reviewed - only problem is review sites generally don't go and re-test older GPU's with newer CPU's to check this - It is however the case.

Of course, the solution is to run the games at much higher resolutions than the standard 1080p/1600x1200 reviewers usually use, but then you find yourself being bottlenecked by the video memory for extreme resolutions or multi-monitor setups.

Take this for example : http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-480-3-way-sli-crossfire,2622-11.html

What we see here is extremely high resolution and settings allowing the third GPU to make a much bigger difference using AA, when you tax the GPU even more with 4xMSAA, the jump in power is even higher in the switch to 2-way as it is from single to 2-way, this is because in these situations the GPU is running at it's full capacity and not being held back by the CPU, in lower resolutions the difference between SLI and tri-sli is much, much less because the maximum performance is being held back by the CPU.

im talking about multi screen gaming as that is the only use case i see tri or quad sli being useful for. i agree that cpu will hold you back on a single monitor but thats well in to 100+ fps. However when pushing 3x1080p youll be struggling to do 60 fps with quad sli anything... best bet before the titan was tri 680 sli which barely plays bf3 maxed out on 3 monitors at 60fps(4 gb models).

LOL more like a 35-45% increase!   A highly overclocked 7970 GHz could trade blows with it at stock.

 If it sells for $600-$650, then it will be a very serious and recomendable contender.  Anything more and it is just a d!ck measuring card so rich people (Or stupid) can show off their triple SLI.   The fact is a $900 7990 would absolutely destroy this by atleast 50-60%.

I really hope it is reasonably priced too.  I wouldn't mind there being a new super card tier...

This generation AMD has mopped the floor with Nvidia in price/performance.  Sure the 680 and 670 were great deals when they came out, but Nvidia could never reliably produce them so they were always out of stock.  AND nobody saw the mega performance increases coming.   I mean I checked some old benchmarks, and my current 7970 beats early 2012's 7970 Toxic by 20%.  It's like a new card at this point.  

IMO Nvidia should tread carefully.   A $380 7970 is equal to a $470 680 in performance  (AMD just magically fixed that "Frame Latteny" that I never noticed too with 13.2).   If AMD keeps up this kind of lead in price/performance for one or two generations, Geoforce will lose its highly regarded name....