GeForce GTX Titan for Mac

[Garamond]

Dunno if this has been discussed:
http://rampagedev.wordpress.com/2013/04/07/nvidia-titian-for-mac/

Seems like 10.8.4 beta brings support for this beast of a card.

 

[xcodeSyn]

There was already a long thread discussing the GTX Titan here. The real issue for Titan is that it has a TDP of 250W, so an external power supply may be required. Also Nvidia may introduce a Titan LE version later this year, which is a cheaper version of its big brother.

 

[Rampage Dev]

Still I was able to show it works. Its a start. I am looking forward to Nvidia retail driver release to see what happens.

 

[Tutor]

Mac users nourish Hackintosh users nourish Mac users nourish ... ad infinitum.

Still I was able to show it works. Its a start. I am looking forward to Nvidia retail driver release to see what happens.

Great job, Rampage Dev. We thank you and the other early explorers (like, e.g., Flavio and netkas) for blazing the trail and giving us a glimpse of what may lie ahead for Mac Pro users to tremendously increase the compute performance of their systems, despite whatever Apple has planned for us. Each of you have added to our knowledge something different because of your differing perspectives. A full circle could not be drawn without the initial dots you early explorers place.

 

[RoastingPig]

the titan is a beast.

 

[MacVidCards]

Already old news.

http://netkas.org

 

[Rampage Dev]

Already old news.

http://netkas.org

New news because he never showed any benchmarks.

 

[MacVidCards]

Hey, can you check CUDA-Z?

The single precision number makes no sense.

I am curious if it is just because I enabled the PCIE 2.0 function, which seems to have doubled the memory copy speeds.

Here is the lspci report as well.

01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: nVidia Corporation Unknown device 1005 (rev a1) (prog-if 00 [VGA controller])
Subsystem: eVga.com. Corp. Unknown device 2790
Control: I/O- Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx+
Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR- INTx-
Latency: 0
Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 18
Region 0: Memory at 9a000000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable)
Region 1: Memory at <ignored> (64-bit, prefetchable)
Region 3: Memory at <ignored> (64-bit, prefetchable)
Region 5: I/O ports at 3000 [disabled]
Capabilities: [60] Power Management version 3
Flags: PMEClk- DSI- D1- D2- AuxCurrent=0mA PME(D0-,D1-,D2-,D3hot-,D3cold-)
Status: D0 PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=0 PME-
Capabilities: [68] Message Signalled Interrupts: Mask- 64bit+ Queue=0/0 Enable+
Address: 00000000fee00000 Data: 4092
Capabilities: [78] Express (v2) Endpoint, MSI 00
DevCap: MaxPayload 256 bytes, PhantFunc 0, Latency L0s unlimited, L1 <64us
ExtTag+ AttnBtn- AttnInd- PwrInd- RBE+ FLReset-
DevCtl: Report errors: Correctable- Non-Fatal- Fatal- Unsupported-
RlxdOrd+ ExtTag+ PhantFunc- AuxPwr- NoSnoop+
MaxPayload 128 bytes, MaxReadReq 512 bytes
DevSta: CorrErr- UncorrErr- FatalErr- UnsuppReq- AuxPwr- TransPend-
LnkCap: Port #4, Speed 5GT/s, Width x16, ASPM L0s L1, Latency L0 <512ns, L1 <4us
ClockPM+ Suprise- LLActRep- BwNot-
LnkCtl: ASPM Disabled; RCB 64 bytes Disabled- Retrain- CommClk-
ExtSynch- ClockPM+ AutWidDis- BWInt- AutBWInt-
LnkSta: Speed 5GT/s, Width x16, TrErr- Train- SlotClk+ DLActive- BWMgmt- ABWMgmt-
Capabilities: [100] #10de
Capabilities: [100] <chain looped>

 

[Tutor]

This is what I meant above about differences in perspective being a good thing.

Hey, can you check CUDA-Z?

The single precision number makes no sense.

You're right that it makes no sense. But what does it mean? CUDA-Z needs an update, for the Titan is too powerful. See snapshoots of a set of Titan triplets. Note single and double precision measures. Then compare to the pic of the 690 twins - that's actually just one GTX 690 card. All four cards were in my old EVGA SR-2 system [ http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/500630 ] at the same time that performance was [attempted to be] measured. This is how they were arrayed from top to bottom in the PCI-e 2.0 slots of my SR-2 - Titan 0, Titan 1, Titan 2, and 690. That number we're getting (an error message for an out of range error [ see also post #564 here: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1333421/ ]) is because the number to be read is too high for CUDA Z to read accurately [and with overclocking, I'm getting the same thing for double precision also for Titans 0 and 2]. Since all three Titans were clocked the same, as a group, in Precision X, we know that for double precision, on each of those two cards I'm getting higher than 2,109.1 Gflop/s or 2.1091 Tflop/s. Why do we know that? CUDA-Z can, at least, read up to the performance level of that slow poke Titan 1 - 2.1091 Tflops. Since slow poke was the middle card towards the top, it reached thermal max sooner than the outer and lower cards. Thus, the other two Titan cards were blazing with my overclock which improved double precision floating point peak performance of slow poke by over 60% higher than that of a $3.5K+ Tesla K20X (1.31 Tflops) [ http://www.nvidia.com/object/tesla-servers.html ]. The point where the error surfaces is probably somewhere between 2.1091 Tflops and 1.02x higher than 2.1091 Tflops (1083 / 1059= 1.02266288951841 - it's the approximate delta in 24/32 bit integer results in Giop/s using that as a proxy since I didn't have anything else to use as a performance measure.) I was running LuxMark when I took these snapshots. I know that the SR-2 is not the best home for GTX Titans and 690s, and that's why my performance is not at its max. But I'll soon place them in a better home [ maybe this one - http://www.supermicro.com/products/system/4U/7047/SYS-7047GR-TRF.cfm ] that has 4+ PCI-e 3.0 slots, at least 4 of which are X16 for 4 double-wide Titans - namely, Atlas, Prometheus, Epimetheus, and Menoetius. I also recognize that these were not actually the names of the Titans, but the names of the sons of Iapetus (who was a Titan).

 

[lewdvig]

there is an LE version of Titan coming this summer with a 190 watt TDP according to the rumor sites.

should have added benefit of pushing gtx680 down in price too