OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan X review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£1,060VRAM:12 GBMemory bus width:384 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):250 W

NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan X Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 16 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan X
6.5/10

Overall score

Score
6.5/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 82% of models
Score components

40%

5.0

Technical score

25%

8.4

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

5.0

Sentiment score

▼Worse than 82% of graphics cards
6.0

Value for money

Value for money
6.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 98% of models
Score components

70%

6.5

Overall score

30%

4.9

Price

▼Worse than 98%
5.0

Technical score

Technical score
5.0/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 83% of models
Score components

44%

3.1

Performance

24%

5.9

Memory

12%

6.6

Power

11%

6.4

Features

5%

8.5

Design

4%

7.9

Connectivity

▼Worse than 83%
8.4

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.4/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 85% of models

80%

8.3

Average grade

20%

8.9

Popularity

Grades by review (16)
13 reviews: 8 with a printed score, 5 estimated from the review. 3 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▲Better than 85%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x
  • nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x
nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x
nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan X

Based on 13 · 3

Reviewers praise its powerful chip and strong gaming performance, but find compute performance lacking and question who it really suits.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan X

Technical score
Technical score
5.0/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 83% of models
Score components:

44%

3.1

Performance

24%

5.9

Memory

12%

6.6

Power

11%

6.4

Features

5%

8.5

Design

4%

7.9

Connectivity

5.0
Reviews score
8.4
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 98% of models
Score components:

70%

6.5

Overall score

30%

4.9

Price

6.0
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
5,307 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 5,307 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 84.1% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 0 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 83.1% of graphics cards and equal to 16.9% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
11,127 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 11,127 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 82.5% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
5,634 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 5,634 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 80.3% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
6.69 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 6.69 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 81.4% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
VRAM
12 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 12 GB of VRAM, which is more than 46% of graphics cards and equal to 16% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR5
This graphics card uses GDDR5 memory, which is older than on 85.4% of graphics cards and equal to 13.2% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
384 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 384 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 89.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
336.5 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 336.5 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 63.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
7,010 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 7,010 MHz, which is slower than that of 89.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.4% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
PCI Express (PCIe) version
3
This graphics card supports PCIe 3, which is older than on 77.6% of graphics cards and equal to 20.1% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 24.1% of graphics cards and equal to 75.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12.1
This graphics card supports DirectX 12.1, which is older than on 77.2% of graphics cards and equal to 4.5% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.8% of graphics cards and equal to 79.2% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
Max displays supported
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 9% of graphics cards and equal to 88.2% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
5120x3200
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 5120x3200, which is lower than that of 90.9% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
3
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 3 DisplayPort outputs, which is more than 21.7% of graphics cards and equal to 76% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.2
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.2, which is older than on 93.9% of graphics cards and equal to 5.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
5.4 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 5.4 Gbps, which is slower than on 87.9% of graphics cards and equal to 6% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
250 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 250 W, which is higher than that of 59.1% of graphics cards and equal to that of 6.3% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
247 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 247 W under peak load, which is higher than 57.3% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
600 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 600 W PSU, which is lower than that of 53.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 8.6% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
275 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 275 W, which is higher than that of 63.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.4% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
250 W
Show more
What reviewers say
Size
267x 111x 38 mm
Length
267 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 267 mm long, which is shorter than 59.3% of graphics cards and equal in length to 3.5% of graphics cards.
Height
111.15 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 111.15 mm tall, which is shorter than 81.1% of graphics cards and equal in height to 2.4% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2 slot/s, which is slimmer than 52.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 43.4% of graphics cards.
Weight
942 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 942 g, which is lighter than 59.8% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of Graphics cards.
Show more

NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan X vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 192 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (384 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    384 bit vs 192 bit
  • 32 more ROPs
    This graphics card has more ROPs than the average graphics card (96 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    96 vs 64
  • 16.7% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.4/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▲ Better than 85% of models

    80%

    8.3

    Average grade

    20%

    8.9

    Popularity

    Grades by review (16)
    13 reviews: 8 with a printed score, 5 estimated from the review. 3 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.4 vs 7.2
  • 13.85 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111.2 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111.15 mm vs 125 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 3 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (3 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    3 vs 0
  • 1 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    1 vs 0
  • Supports NVLink
    This graphics card supports NVLink, the average graphics card does not.
  • 16.7% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.4/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▲ Better than 85% of models

    80%

    8.3

    Average grade

    20%

    8.9

    Popularity

    Grades by review (16)
    13 reviews: 8 with a printed score, 5 estimated from the review. 3 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.4 vs 7.2
  • 32 more ROPs
    This graphics card has more ROPs than the average graphics card (96 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    96 vs 64
  • 192 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (384 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    384 bit vs 192 bit
  • 0.2% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,753 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,753 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 3 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (3 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    3 vs 0
  • Supports multi-GPU linking
    This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.
  • Supports NVLink
    This graphics card supports NVLink, the average graphics card does not.
  • 1 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    1 vs 0
  • 7.7% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (600 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    600 W vs 650 W
  • 13.85 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111.2 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111.15 mm vs 125 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 56.5% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,089 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,089 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 5.6x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    28 nm vs 5 nm
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 47.9% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,000 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,000 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 16 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (24 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    24 vs 40
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • 35.9% lower sentiment score
    5.0 vs 7.8
  • 23.2% worse value for money
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan X has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.02 vs 7.4).
    6.02 vs 7.41
  • 2.04x more expensive
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan X is more expensive than the average graphics card (£1,060 vs £520).
    £1,060 vs £520
  • 56.5% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,089 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,089 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 47.9% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,000 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,000 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 16 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (24 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    24 vs 40
  • 144 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    0 vs 144
  • 49.2% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (192 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    192 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 70.4% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (6.7 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    6.69 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 35.2% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (104.5 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    104.5 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 8 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2015 vs 2023).
    March 2015
    2015 vs 2023
  • 50.8% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (11,127 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    11,127 points vs 22,638 points
  • 64.1% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (5,307 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    5,307 points vs 14,779 points
  • 99.7% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (0.1 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    0.1 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 53.3% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (5,634 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    5,634 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 56.3% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0.2 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.21 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 63.1% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (7,010 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    7,010 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 87.5% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (3 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    3 MB vs 24 MB
  • 24.9% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (336.5 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    336.5 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 62.5% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (48 KB vs 128 KB). The average graphics card has 128 KB L1 cache.
    48 KB vs 128 KB
  • 5.6x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    28 nm vs 5 nm
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No ray tracing
    This graphics card does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (3 vs 4).
    3 vs 4
  • No AI upscalers
    This graphics card does not support AI upscalers, the average graphics card does.
  • No XeSS support
    This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No mesh shaders
    This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, the average graphics card does.
  • No Resizable BAR
    This graphics card does not support Resizable BAR, while the average graphics card does. 76.4% of Graphics cards support it.
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12.1 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12.1 vs 12 Ultimate
  • 2.04x larger GPU die
    This graphics card has a higher GPU die size than the average graphics card (601 mm² vs 294 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 294 mm².
    601 mm² vs 294 mm²
  • No sampler feedback
    This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
  • 65.1% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (8,000 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    8,000 million vs 22,900 million
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2 vs 2.1a).
    2.0 vs 2.1a
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No DSC support
    This graphics card does not support DSC, the average graphics card does.
  • No VRR support
    This graphics card does not support VRR, the average graphics card does.
  • Older DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4a).
    1.2 vs 1.4a
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Older NVDEC generation
    This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (1 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
    1 vs 6
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (2.2 vs 2.3).
    2.2 vs 2.3
  • Lower display resolution
    This graphics card supports a lower maximum digital resolution than the average graphics card (5120x3200 vs 7680x4320). The average graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320.
    5120x3200 vs 7680x4320
  • 75% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (5.4 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 21.6 Gbps.
    5.4 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
  • 16.3% higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (250 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    250 W vs 215 W
  • 16 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (83 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    83 °C vs 67 °C
  • 32 dB noisier at idle
    This graphics card has a higher idle noise level than the average graphics card (32 dB vs 0 dB). The average graphics card has an idle noise level of 0 dB.
    32 dB vs 0 dB
  • 25% higher board power limit
    This graphics card has a higher board power limit than the average graphics card (275 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    275 W vs 220 W
  • 4.6 dB noisier under load
    This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (40 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    40 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

5.0
Proceu Tech
≈ estimated
14/03/2023
Hands-on review · one week of use and benchmarks
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan X is the strongest Maxwell card, but hard to recommend in 2023 unless you need its 12GB of VRAM.
9.0
Tech of Tomorrow
≈ estimated
17/03/2015
Hands-on review · 4K benchmarks and temperatures
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan X offers top performance for enthusiasts, but it is expensive, niche and has immature drivers.
Hands-on video, no verdict

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

9.0
techgage.com
≈ estimated
17/03/2015
Hands-on test · 4K gaming
Verdict
The GeForce GTX Titan X is a powerful single card for 4K, though its 12GB of memory is hard to fill and 60fps at max settings takes tuning.
9.0
trustedreviews.com
✓ explicit
17/03/2015
Lab test · Flagship graphics card
Verdict
The GeForce GTX Titan X is the fastest single-GPU card you can buy, aimed at gamers who want peak performance beyond 1080p and 1440p.
7.0
digitalfoundry.net
≈ estimated
18/03/2015
Benchmark test · Maxwell flagship
Verdict
The GeForce GTX Titan X is a clear step up from the GTX 980 in demanding games, though at 1080p the gap narrows to 26% on average.
8.0
pcmag.com
✓ explicit
18/03/2015
Benchmark test · High-end 4K card
Verdict
The GeForce GTX Titan X comes closest to single-card 4K gaming, but its cut-back double-precision speed makes it more of a gaming card than a work card.
9.0
trustedreviews.com
✓ explicit
17/03/2015
Lab test · Flagship graphics card
Verdict
The GeForce GTX Titan X is the fastest single-GPU card you can buy, aimed at gamers who want peak performance beyond 1080p and 1440p.
9.0
techradar.com
✓ explicit
25/04/2019
Benchmark test · Architecture deep dive
Verdict
The GeForce GTX Titan X uses the full GM200 core and 12GB of memory, making it a gaming-only card that clearly beats the GTX 980 at 4K.
9.0
pcworld.com
✓ explicit
17/03/2015
Hands-on test · Single-GPU 4K card
Verdict
The GeForce GTX Titan X is the fastest single-GPU card and the first to run many games at 4K high settings without multiple cards, though 60fps isn't always hit.
9.3
gamestar.de
✓ explicit
17/03/2015
Benchmark review · 4K gaming
Verdict
The GeForce GTX Titan X is a top-end card for maximum performance, with 3,072 shaders and 12 GB of memory, though few players can use all of it.
8.0
pcgameshardware.de
≈ estimated
17/03/2015
Lab test · Noise and power
Verdict
The GeForce GTX Titan X is the strongest single chip for 4K, with the full GM200 core, but it is louder than the GTX 980 under load.
10
lesnumeriques.com
✓ explicit
20/03/2015
Lab test · 4K gaming
Verdict
The GeForce GTX Titan X is a top single-GPU card, quiet at idle, but it's overkill at Full HD and needs two cards for the most demanding 4K.
9.5
tomshardware.fr
≈ estimated
17/03/2015
Benchmark review · 4K gaming
Verdict
The GeForce GTX Titan X is a powerful single-GPU card with a quiet cooler and DirectX 12.1 support, but it lacks double-precision speed for scientific work.
9.0
geeknetic.es
✓ explicit
17/03/2015
Analysis review · Rendering features
Verdict
The GeForce GTX Titan X leans on DSR and MFAA for sharper images rather than raw memory bandwidth, which helps demanding 4K players.
9.0
hwready.it
≈ estimated
17/03/2015
Hands-on review · Overclock testing
Verdict
The GeForce GTX Titan X is a single-GPU card with 8 billion transistors, but overclocking needs a louder fan and its memory runs hot.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan X

  • Unparalleled single-GPU performance for its era, making 4K gaming more consistent
  • Massive 12GB of VRAM provides a significant buffer for high-resolution textures and future-proofing
  • Impressive power efficiency for its class, maintaining a reasonable 250-watt TDP
  • Blower-style cooling design runs relatively quietly and exhausts heat outside the chassis
  • Premium build quality with a sleek aluminum cover and unique black aesthetic

What customers don't like about NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan X

  • Extremely high launch price ($999), making it a niche enthusiast product
  • Temperatures can quickly reach the 84°C limit, leading to thermal throttling during heavy use
  • Fans do not turn off at idle and can become loud when attempting to stay under temperature limits
  • Lacks a backplate and full double-precision support compared to previous Titan models
  • Overclocking can be limited and complex due to restrictive power targets

Verdict

The Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan X is an enthusiast-class graphics card based on the 28nm Maxwell 2.0 architecture, featuring a fully unlocked GM200 GPU with 3,072 CUDA cores, 192 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs. It is equipped with a massive 12GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit interface, delivering 336.5 GB/s of bandwidth with a base clock of 1,000 MHz and a boost clock of 1,075 MHz. Its primary advantages include being the fastest single-GPU card of its era, offering smooth 4K gaming performance and a large frame buffer ideal for high-resolution textures and content creation. However, it suffers from a high launch price of $999, high operating temperatures reaching 84°C that can lead to thermal throttling, and significantly reduced double-precision compute performance compared to its Kepler-based predecessors.

Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan X with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan X and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found