NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results present a clear split between these two Kepler-based cards. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN delivers a score of 24873, which is 30% ahead of the GTX 690's 17399. That is a substantial margin in raw compute throughput. The TITAN's result reflects its larger silicon and higher shading unit count, which scales directly in OpenCL workloads that are not bandwidth or latency limited.

The Geekbench Vulkan test tells the opposite story. The GTX 690 scores 16675, while the GTX TITAN manages only 10027. That puts the 690 66.3% ahead. Vulkan is a lower-level API that rewards balanced hardware and efficient command processing. The dual-GPU design of the GTX 690 appears to handle Vulkan's explicit multi-queue nature far better than the single-GPU TITAN. The delta here is large enough that it is not a minor edge; it is a decisive win for the 690 in this specific API.

Looking at the nearest rivals in the database, both cards sit in similar percentile territory. The GTX 690 has a percentile of 60 among all GPUs, while the GTX TITAN sits at 56. The 690's average benchmark score is 17037, and its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT at 17083 (0.3% higher) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 at 17208 (1% higher). The TITAN's average score is 14373, placing it near the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 at 14385 (0.1% higher) and the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics at 14315 (0.4% lower). Notably, the TITAN's average is dragged down by its weak Vulkan result, while its OpenCL score is far above that average. The 690's two benchmark scores are closer together, which makes its average a more consistent representation of its performance profile.

The head-to-head data shows one win for each card. The TITAN wins OpenCL by a wide margin, and the 690 wins Vulkan by an even wider margin in relative terms. If a workload uses OpenCL, the TITAN is the clear choice. If it uses Vulkan, the 690 is far ahead. There is no single overall winner based on these measurements; the winner depends entirely on the API in use.

Architecture Differences

Both cards use the Kepler architecture and are built on TSMC's 28 nm process. That is where the similarity ends at the silicon level. The GTX 690 uses the GK104 chip with 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. The GTX TITAN uses the GK110 chip with 7,080 million transistors on a 561 mm² die. That is exactly double the transistor count and roughly 91% more die area. Transistor density is similar, 12.0M per mm² for the 690 and 12.6M per mm² for the TITAN, but the sheer scale of the GK110 is what drives the TITAN's compute advantage.

The memory subsystem differs significantly. The GTX 690 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256 bit bus, yielding 192.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX TITAN has 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384 bit bus, yielding 288.4 GB/s. The TITAN has 50% more memory bandwidth and three times the capacity. Both run memory at 1502 MHz with 6 Gbps effective speed. The TITAN's wider bus is the reason for its bandwidth advantage.

Compute resources also favor the TITAN. It has 2688 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs. The GTX 690 has 1536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The TITAN has 75% more shaders, 75% more TMUs, and 50% more ROPs. Pixel rate is 49.06 GPixel/s for the TITAN versus 32.61 GPixel/s for the 690. Texture rate is 196.2 GTexel/s versus 130.4 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 4.709 TFLOPS versus 3.130 TFLOPS. Clock speeds tell a different part of the story: the 690 runs at a base of 915 MHz and a boost of 1019 MHz, while the TITAN runs at 836 MHz base and 876 MHz boost. The 690's higher clocks partially compensate for its smaller chip.

The GTX 690 is a dual-GPU card. Its specifications reflect a single GK104 per board, but the card itself carries two of these chips. The TITAN is a single-GPU card. This structural difference explains why the 690's average benchmark score is higher than the TITAN's, despite the TITAN having a much larger GPU: the 690 effectively has two GPUs working in parallel. The TITAN's power draw is lower at 250 W versus 300 W, and it requires only a 600 W suggested PSU versus 700 W for the 690. The 690 needs two 8-pin power connectors, while the TITAN needs one 6-pin and one 8-pin.

Both cards support PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs differ: the 690 has three DVI ports and one mini-DisplayPort 1.2, while the TITAN has two DVI ports, one HDMI 1.4a, and one DisplayPort 1.2. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. Physical dimensions are close: the 690 is 279 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 38 mm wide. The TITAN is 267 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 38 mm wide. Both are dual-slot cards.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX TITAN wins in OpenCL compute. Its 30% lead in that benchmark aligns with its larger chip, more shading units, and higher memory bandwidth. If a task is built on OpenCL, the TITAN's architecture is the better match. The 6 GB memory capacity also gives it a clear edge for workloads that need to hold larger datasets on the card. The TITAN's 288.4 GB/s bandwidth helps in memory-heavy operations.

The GTX 690 wins in Vulkan. Its 66.3% lead is significant, and this is the kind of result that matters for modern games and applications that use Vulkan. The dual-GPU setup appears to handle Vulkan's explicit per-queue submission model well. The 690's higher clock speeds, 915 MHz base versus 836 MHz base, also help in latency-sensitive tasks where raw frequency matters more than core count.

For gaming specifically, the Vulkan result is the more relevant one in modern contexts. The 690's win there suggests it handles current-generation API workloads better. For compute and productivity tasks that use OpenCL, the TITAN is the stronger card. Its 4.709 TFLOPS FP32 output and 196.2 GTexel/s texture rate give it a raw throughput advantage that shows up in the OpenCL score. The 690 is not far behind in FP32 at 3.130 TFLOPS, but the gap in the benchmark result is larger than the spec gap would suggest.

Power efficiency is not directly benchmarked, but the TDP figures are informative. The TITAN draws 250 W, the 690 draws 300 W. For a single-GPU card, the TITAN delivers more compute per watt. The 690's dual-GPU design inherently uses more power. The suggested PSU reflects this: 600 W for the TITAN, 700 W for the 690.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL?

A: The GTX TITAN scores 24873 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 30% ahead of the GTX 690's 17399.

Q: Which card is faster in Vulkan?

A: The GTX 690 scores 16675 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 66.3% ahead of the GTX TITAN's 10027.

Q: Do both cards use the same architecture?

A: Yes. Both use the Kepler architecture and are built on TSMC's 28 nm process. The GTX 690 uses the GK104 chip, while the GTX TITAN uses the GK110 chip.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The GTX 690 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256 bit bus. The GTX TITAN has 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384 bit bus with 288.4 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The GTX 690 has a TDP of 300 W and requires a 700 W suggested PSU with two 8-pin connectors. The GTX TITAN has a TDP of 250 W and requires a 600 W suggested PSU with one 6-pin and one 8-pin connector.

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The GTX 690 has an average benchmark score of 17037, while the GTX TITAN has 14373. The 690's two benchmark scores are closer together, while the TITAN's average is pulled down by its low Vulkan score.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward choice based on workload. If the primary use is OpenCL compute, the GTX TITAN is the stronger card. It has a 30% lead in that benchmark, more memory, more bandwidth, and a larger GPU with more shading units. Its 6 GB capacity and 288.4 GB/s bandwidth make it the better option for large compute tasks. The TITAN also has a lower TDP at 250 W versus 300 W, which is a practical advantage in system building.

If the primary use involves Vulkan, the GTX 690 is the clear winner. Its 66.3% lead in that benchmark is the largest margin in the head-to-head data. The 690 also holds a higher average benchmark score, 17037 versus 14373, and a higher percentile ranking, 60 versus 56. For gaming with modern Vulkan titles, the 690 is the better card despite being older and having less memory.

The GTX 690's dual-GPU design is a key factor. It delivers strong Vulkan performance and a higher average score, but it requires more power and a bigger PSU. The TITAN is a single-GPU card that is simpler to integrate and more efficient. Both cards are end-of-life, so these considerations apply to used or existing systems rather than new builds.

There is no universal winner. The benchmark results are split, with each card winning one test by a wide margin. The choice comes down to which API and workload matters more. For OpenCL compute, pick the TITAN. For Vulkan, pick the 690. The database does not show a card that dominates both.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN |

|---|---|---|

| Generation | GeForce 600 | GeForce 700 |

| Chip | GK104 | GK110 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 3,540 million | 7,080 million |

| Die Size | 294 mm² | 561 mm² |

| Base Clock | 915 MHz | 836 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1019 MHz | 876 MHz |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 6 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | 256 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 192.3 GB/s | 288.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1536 | 2688 |

| TMUs | 128 | 224 |

| ROPs | 32 | 48 |

| Pixel Rate | 32.61 GPixel/s | 49.06 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 130.4 GTexel/s | 196.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.130 TFLOPS | 4.709 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 300 W | 250 W |

| Power Connectors | 2x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 700 W | 600 W |

| Display Outputs | 3x DVI, 1x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2 |

| Length | 279 mm (11 inches) | 267 mm (10.5 inches) |

| Height | 111 mm (4.4 inches) | 111 mm (4.4 inches) |

| Width | 38 mm (1.5 inches) | 38 mm (1.5 inches) |

| Release Date | 2012-05-02 | 2013-02-18 |

| Launch MSRP | 999 USD | 999 USD |

| Predecessor | GeForce 500 | GeForce 600 |

| Successor | GeForce 700 | GeForce 900 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_0) | 12 (11_0) |

| OpenGL Support | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.175 | 1.2.175 |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |