GeForce GTX TITAN X vs Titan X Pascal

#ad 
Buy
VS
#ad 
Buy

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Titan X Pascal and GeForce GTX TITAN X, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Titan X Pascal
2016
12 GB GDDR5X, 250 Watt
29.13
+1.3%

Titan X Pascal outperforms GTX TITAN X by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking163169
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.997.01
Power efficiency9.279.16
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameGP102GM200
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date2 August 2016 (8 years ago)17 March 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,199 $999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

GTX TITAN X has 17% better value for money than Titan X Pascal.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores35843072
Core clock speed1417 MHz1000 MHz
Boost clock speed1531 MHz1075 MHz
Number of transistors11,800 million8,000 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate342.9209.1
Floating-point processing power10.97 TFLOPS6.691 TFLOPS
ROPs9696
TMUs224192

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Bus supportno dataPCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mm267 mm
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
Width2-slot2-slot
Recommended system power (PSU)no data600 Watt
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
SLI options-4x

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5XGDDR5
Maximum RAM amount12 GB12 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed1251 MHz7.0 GB/s
Memory bandwidth480.4 GB/s336.5 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPortDual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2
Multi monitor supportno data4 displays
HDMI++
HDCP-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
G-SYNC support+-
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

GameStream-+
GeForce ShadowPlay-+
GPU Boostno data2.0
GameWorks-+

API and SDK compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+1.1.126
CUDA+5.2

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

Titan X Pascal 29.13
+1.3%
GTX TITAN X 28.77

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Titan X Pascal 13026
+1.3%
GTX TITAN X 12863

Unigine Heaven 4.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark, a newer version of Unigine 3.0 with relatively small differences. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. The benchmark is still sometimes used, despite its significant age, as it was released back in 2013.

Titan X Pascal 4329
+66.2%
GTX TITAN X 2604

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD125
+4.2%
120−130
−4.2%
1440p76
+1.3%
75−80
−1.3%
4K59
+7.3%
55−60
−7.3%

Cost per frame, $

1080p9.59
−15.2%
8.33
+15.2%
1440p15.78
−18.4%
13.32
+18.4%
4K20.32
−11.9%
18.16
+11.9%
  • GTX TITAN X has 15% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • GTX TITAN X has 18% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • GTX TITAN X has 12% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 173
+1.8%
170−180
−1.8%
Counter-Strike 2 337
+12.3%
300−310
−12.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 83
+3.8%
80−85
−3.8%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 127
+5.8%
120−130
−5.8%
Battlefield 5 153
+2%
150−160
−2%
Counter-Strike 2 291
+3.9%
280−290
−3.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 74
+5.7%
70−75
−5.7%
Far Cry 5 162
+8%
150−160
−8%
Fortnite 210
+5%
200−210
−5%
Forza Horizon 4 127
+5.8%
120−130
−5.8%
Forza Horizon 5 119
+8.2%
110−120
−8.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 113
+2.7%
110−120
−2.7%
Valorant 296
+2.1%
290−300
−2.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 78
+4%
75−80
−4%
Battlefield 5 147
+5%
140−150
−5%
Counter-Strike 2 205
+2.5%
200−210
−2.5%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+1.9%
270−280
−1.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 65
+8.3%
60−65
−8.3%
Dota 2 252
+5%
240−250
−5%
Far Cry 5 149
+6.4%
140−150
−6.4%
Fortnite 199
+4.7%
190−200
−4.7%
Forza Horizon 4 121
+10%
110−120
−10%
Forza Horizon 5 106
+6%
100−105
−6%
Grand Theft Auto V 160
+6.7%
150−160
−6.7%
Metro Exodus 96
+6.7%
90−95
−6.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 113
+2.7%
110−120
−2.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 184
+2.2%
180−190
−2.2%
Valorant 275
+1.9%
270−280
−1.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 137
+5.4%
130−140
−5.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 57
+3.6%
55−60
−3.6%
Dota 2 232
+5.5%
220−230
−5.5%
Far Cry 5 140
+7.7%
130−140
−7.7%
Forza Horizon 4 112
+1.8%
110−120
−1.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 102
+2%
100−105
−2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 95
+5.6%
90−95
−5.6%
Valorant 181
+6.5%
170−180
−6.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 170
+6.3%
160−170
−6.3%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 111
+11%
100−105
−11%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220
+3.8%
210−220
−3.8%
Grand Theft Auto V 103
+3%
100−105
−3%
Metro Exodus 58
+5.5%
55−60
−5.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+2.9%
170−180
−2.9%
Valorant 258
+3.2%
250−260
−3.2%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+5%
80−85
−5%
Cyberpunk 2077 37
+5.7%
35−40
−5.7%
Far Cry 5 101
+6.3%
95−100
−6.3%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+7.5%
80−85
−7.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+1.8%
55−60
−1.8%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 80−85
+6.7%
75−80
−6.7%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+16.7%
30−33
−16.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 99
+4.2%
95−100
−4.2%
Metro Exodus 36
+2.9%
35−40
−2.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 68
+4.6%
65−70
−4.6%
Valorant 257
+2.8%
250−260
−2.8%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 71
+1.4%
70−75
−1.4%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+16.7%
30−33
−16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 17
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Dota 2 160
+6.7%
150−160
−6.7%
Far Cry 5 53
+6%
50−55
−6%
Forza Horizon 4 73
+4.3%
70−75
−4.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 44
+10%
40−45
−10%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 60
+9.1%
55−60
−9.1%

This is how Titan X Pascal and GTX TITAN X compete in popular games:

  • Titan X Pascal is 4% faster in 1080p
  • Titan X Pascal is 1% faster in 1440p
  • Titan X Pascal is 7% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 29.13 28.77
Recency 2 August 2016 17 March 2015
Chip lithography 16 nm 28 nm

Titan X Pascal has a 1.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Titan X Pascal and GeForce GTX TITAN X.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA Titan X Pascal
Titan X Pascal
NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X
GeForce GTX TITAN X

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


2.6 3001 vote

Rate Titan X Pascal on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 242 votes

Rate GeForce GTX TITAN X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Titan X Pascal or GeForce GTX TITAN X, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.