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 Titan X review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£1,140VRAM:12 GBMemory bus width:384 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):250 W

NVIDIA Titan X Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 18 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

NVIDIA Titan X
7.0/10

Overall score

Score
7.0/ 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 67% of models
Score components

40%

5.4

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%

8.3

Sentiment score

▼Worse than 67% of graphics cards
6.2

Value for money

Value for money
6.2/ 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 93% of models
Score components

70%

7.0

Overall score

30%

4.5

Price

▼Worse than 93%
5.4

Technical score

Technical score
5.4/ 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 78% of models
Score components

44%

3.6

Performance

24%

6.5

Memory

12%

6.6

Power

11%

6.6

Features

5%

8.9

Design

4%

8.3

Connectivity

▼Worse than 78%
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%

8.2

Average grade

20%

8.9

Popularity

Grades by review (18)
17 reviews: 8 with a printed score, 9 estimated from the review. 1 video review, 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-titan-x
  • nvidia-titan-x
  • nvidia-titan-x
  • nvidia-titan-x
nvidia-titan-x
nvidia-titan-x
nvidia-titan-x
nvidia-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 Titan X

Based on 17 · 1

Reviewers praise its huge video memory and core count, but complain it runs hot and falls short for professional work.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the NVIDIA Titan X

Based on 178 owners sharing their experience in online comments

75%positive13%mixed12%negative

Owners praise its lasting gaming and rendering power, while heat, fan noise, and steep pricing draw the main complaints.

What owners dislike

  • Owners say it cost far more than its performance justified, and the 980 Ti offered nearly the same speed for much less.16
  • The stock blower cooler runs hot and loud under load, and its fan curve limits boost clocks until owners change it.12
  • Owners report only around 25 to 60 fps in demanding games like Assassin's Creed Unity or Crysis 3 at high settings.12
  • Under heavy gaming load the stock blower fan gets very loud, and owners often replace the cooler to reduce the noise.7
  • The 980 Ti and later cards matched or beat it in games, so its value dropped quickly after release.6
  • Some owners report fans failing or the card dying, and one owner had an RMA because the fan stopped working.5

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card NVIDIA Titan X

Technical score
Technical score
5.4/ 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 78% of models
Score components:

44%

3.6

Performance

24%

6.5

Memory

12%

6.6

Power

11%

6.6

Features

5%

8.9

Design

4%

8.3

Connectivity

5.4
Reviews score
8.4
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.2/ 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 93% of models
Score components:

70%

7.0

Overall score

30%

4.5

Price

6.2
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
13,660 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 13,660 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 77% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
5,620 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 5,620 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 80.3% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
11 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 11 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 72.2% 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
480 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 480 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is higher than that of 53.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
10,008 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 10,008 MHz, which is slower than that of 83.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.3% 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
4.5
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.5, which is older than on 98% of graphics cards and equal to 0.8% of graphics cards.
Show more
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
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9.2% of graphics cards and equal to 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
8.1 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 8.1 Gbps, which is slower than on 65.3% of graphics cards and equal to 22.5% 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
254 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 254 W under peak load, which is higher than 62.7% 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
260 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 260 W, which is higher than that of 60.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.8% 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 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
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, 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%

    8.2

    Average grade

    20%

    8.9

    Popularity

    Grades by review (18)
    17 reviews: 8 with a printed score, 9 estimated from the review. 1 video review, 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
  • 4 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (4 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    4 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
  • 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%

    8.2

    Average grade

    20%

    8.9

    Popularity

    Grades by review (18)
    17 reviews: 8 with a printed score, 9 estimated from the review. 1 video review, 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
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 7.1% higher memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (480 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    480 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 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
  • 4 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (4 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    4 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
  • 38.9% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,531 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,531 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
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • 12 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (28 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    28 vs 40
  • 19.1% worse value for money
    NVIDIA Titan X has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.22 vs 7.4).
    6.22 vs 7.41
  • 2.19x more expensive
    NVIDIA Titan X is more expensive than the average graphics card (£1,140 vs £520).
    £1,140 vs £520
  • 38.9% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,531 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,531 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
  • 12 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (28 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    28 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
  • 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
  • 51.3% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (11 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    11 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 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
  • 39.7% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (13,660 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    13,660 points vs 22,638 points
  • 99.3% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (0.2 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    0.21 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 53.4% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (5,620 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    5,620 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 47.3% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (10,008 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    10,008 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
  • 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 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.
  • Older OpenGL version
    This graphics card supports an older OpenGL version than the average graphics card (4.5 vs 4.6).
    4.5 vs 4.6
  • Older FSR version
    This graphics card supports an older FSR version than the average graphics card (1 vs 3.1).
    1 vs 3.1
  • 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
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.0b vs 2.1a).
    2.0b vs 2.1a
  • 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.
  • 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 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
  • Older NVDEC generation
    This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (3 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
    3 vs 6
  • 62.5% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (8.1 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 21.6 Gbps.
    8.1 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
  • 30 dB noisier at idle
    This graphics card has a higher idle noise level than the average graphics card (30 dB vs 0 dB). The average graphics card has an idle noise level of 0 dB.
    30 dB vs 0 dB
  • 18.2% higher board power limit
    This graphics card has a higher board power limit than the average graphics card (260 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    260 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 RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

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

9.5
JayzTwoCents
≈ estimated
03/08/2016
Hands-on review · fan curve, overclock and 4K tests
Verdict
NVIDIA Titan X is a very fast card that gets even faster with a more aggressive fan curve.

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.5
techspot.com
✓ explicit
17/03/2015
First look · Maxwell flagship
Verdict
The Nvidia Titan X is a 4K gaming card with 12GB of memory, though Nvidia recommends a 600-watt power supply even for one card.
7.0
guru3d.com
≈ estimated
04/08/2016
Launch review · Pascal 4K card
Verdict
The Nvidia Titan X (Pascal) is built for 4K, with 12GB of memory and high clock speeds, but it is a poor pick for 1080p gaming.
8.0
au.pcmag.com
✓ explicit
14/12/2016
Lab test · Single-GPU 4K card
Verdict
The Nvidia Titan X (Pascal) is the fastest single graphics card for 4K, but it only makes sense if you have a 4K display and want 60 fps.
10
techpowerup.com
✓ explicit
17/03/2015
Architecture review · Maxwell flagship
Verdict
The Nvidia Titan X (Maxwell) packs 50 percent more cores than the GTX 980 and 12GB of memory, though its memory gains partly depend on a compression claim.
8.0
pcmag.com
✓ explicit
18/03/2015
Hands-on test · 4K gaming card
Verdict
The Nvidia Titan X is the best single-card choice for 4K gaming, with 50 percent more cores than the GTX 980, but it suits gamers more than developers.
7.0
digitalfoundry.net
≈ estimated
18/03/2015
Frame-rate tests · Maxwell 4K card
Verdict
The Nvidia Titan X is a clear step up for 4K and much smoother in Crysis 3 than the GTX 980, though only about 26 percent faster at 1080p.
8.0
digitalfoundry.net
≈ estimated
10/08/2016
Overclocking review · Pascal flagship
Verdict
The Nvidia Titan X (Pascal) is the fastest 4K card tested, about 66 percent quicker than the Maxwell Titan X but only about 28 percent ahead of the GTX 1080.
8.0
cnet.com
≈ estimated
14/04/2015
Preliminary tests · Multi-card PCs
Verdict
The Nvidia Titan X delivers very fast 4K frame rates, but it is aimed at buyers who run two or three cards in SLI inside a custom PC.
8.0
pcgamesn.com
≈ estimated
04/10/2016
Benchmark review · Pascal 4K card
Verdict
The Nvidia Titan X is the first single card to hold 60 fps at 4K in most modern games, though it lacks 256 CUDA cores of the full GP102 chip.
forbes.com
21/03/2015
Not graded yet
9.3
gamestar.de
✓ explicit
17/03/2015
Benchmark test · Top-end Maxwell card
Verdict
The Nvidia Titan X is a Maxwell flagship with 12 GB of memory and 50% more shaders than the GTX 980, but few gamers can use its full power.
7.0
chip.de
≈ estimated
30/09/2016
Benchmark test · Pascal flagship
Verdict
The Nvidia Titan X (Pascal) is the strongest card tested while drawing little power and staying quiet, but for pure gaming a consumer card is the better buy.
9.3
gamestar.de
✓ explicit
04/08/2016
Benchmark test · Deep learning card
Verdict
The Nvidia Titan X, a Pascal card with 3,584 shaders and 12 GB of memory, should beat the GTX 1080 but is aimed more at deep learning than gaming.
7.0
computerbild.de
≈ estimated
19/11/2016
Benchmark test · Speed and power
Verdict
The Nvidia Titan X is the fastest card tested, 22% ahead of the GTX 1080, but its heavy power draw and heat limit it to top-end buyers.
10
lesnumeriques.com
✓ explicit
07/10/2016
Lab test · 4K gaming focus
Verdict
The Nvidia Titan X is the first single-GPU card that handles 4K gaming well, though very demanding titles still need light compromises.
7.0
tomshardware.fr
≈ estimated
20/10/2016
Hands-on test · Dual-card SLI
Verdict
The Nvidia Titan X in SLI is the fastest setup tested, but it adds 17 ms of VR lag, and Nvidia no longer supports three- or four-card setups.
9.0
geeknetic.es
✓ explicit
17/03/2015
Full review · Maxwell features
Verdict
The Nvidia Titan X (Maxwell) suits 4K gaming and DSR sharpens images on 1080p screens, but its bandwidth savings were not clear in tested games.
8.0
hwready.it
≈ estimated
17/03/2015
Hands-on review · Maxwell flagship
Verdict
The Nvidia Titan X (Maxwell) is a strong single-GPU card with DSR and MFAA, but its memory runs hot and overclocking needs a louder fan.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about NVIDIA Titan X

  • Unparalleled single-GPU performance at its release, significantly outperforming the GTX 980.
  • Massive 12GB VRAM buffer that provides excellent future-proofing for high-resolution textures.
  • A capable single-card solution for 4K gaming, avoiding the stability and stuttering issues typical of SLI or CrossFire setups.
  • Highly efficient Maxwell architecture with a manageable 250W TDP and relatively quiet operation.
  • Excellent overclocking headroom that allows it to approach the performance of dual-GPU configurations.

What customers don't like about NVIDIA Titan X

  • Extremely high launch price ($999), making it a niche luxury for most enthusiasts.
  • Runs hot quickly, often reaching an 80-84°C thermal limit that can lead to fan noise and throttling.
  • Poor double-precision compute performance (1/32 rate) compared to previous Titan generations, making it less ideal for certain professional scientific tasks.
  • The reference blower-style cooler lacks a backplate and is generally less effective than custom aftermarket coolers found on lower-tier cards.
  • Lacks support for modern features like DLSS and hardware-accelerated Ray Tracing, which impacts its long-term viability in 2024 and beyond.

Verdict

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan X (Maxwell) is an enthusiast-level graphics card featuring 3,072 CUDA cores and a massive 12GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering 7 TFLOPs of single-precision performance. Launched as the definitive single-GPU solution for 4K gaming and high-resolution textures, its primary pros include unparalleled compute power for its era, a future-proof frame buffer, and a relatively efficient 250W TDP despite its physical scale. However, it suffers from a premium price tag, lacks a protective backplate, and quickly hits an 84°C thermal limit, leading to performance throttling during sustained heavy workloads.

Compare NVIDIA 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 Titan X and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found