master_shake_
Diamond Member
- May 22, 2012
- 6,425
- 292
- 121
Get a bigger SSD with the savings from getting a custom R290.
R290X has never been a good option, and nothing has changed.
But at the $350 mark, the 970 is very good.
R290X has never been a good option, and nothing has changed.
But at the $350 mark, the 970 is very good.
SlickR12345
Senior member
The 290x is slightly faster, especially at higher resolutions like 25xx and 4k, its also worth mentioning that the 970 will become slower with drivers, it happens all the time.
People have the opposite notion of what actually happens, but release drivers for new cards are basically the most optimized and performance first drivers you can get, as they start fixing potential issues in games, as they start supporting more stuff, different code, as they add more and more stuff in the drivers the performance will degrade.
So expect the 970 to lose additional 5% performance with newer drivers as we go along.
What the GTX 970 has going for it right now is few good features taking advantage of the latest dx updates and the better power consumption.
So depending on what is more important to you, 10% faster overall performance of the 290x or the newer dx features and smaller power consumption of the 970.
People have the opposite notion of what actually happens, but release drivers for new cards are basically the most optimized and performance first drivers you can get, as they start fixing potential issues in games, as they start supporting more stuff, different code, as they add more and more stuff in the drivers the performance will degrade.
So expect the 970 to lose additional 5% performance with newer drivers as we go along.
What the GTX 970 has going for it right now is few good features taking advantage of the latest dx updates and the better power consumption.
So depending on what is more important to you, 10% faster overall performance of the 290x or the newer dx features and smaller power consumption of the 970.
- Mar 28, 2003
- 3,825
- 46
- 91
Thanks for all the replies guys!
FWIW, I'm planning on a (semi-major) monitor upgrade as well. As I type this, I'm on a roughly 4 year old 22" Samsung TN monitor.
Right now, my front runner monitor is the Dell UltraSharp U2713HM 27" @ 2560 x 1440. That would certainly be the top of the line I could afford at the moment, and the highest res I'd have.
At that res, the 290x has a little bit of an advantage it seems?
FWIW, I'm planning on a (semi-major) monitor upgrade as well. As I type this, I'm on a roughly 4 year old 22" Samsung TN monitor.
Right now, my front runner monitor is the Dell UltraSharp U2713HM 27" @ 2560 x 1440. That would certainly be the top of the line I could afford at the moment, and the highest res I'd have.
At that res, the 290x has a little bit of an advantage it seems?
At 2560x1440 they're about even -- 970 wins out on some benches, 290X wins others. The 290X pulls ahead at 4K resolution, though.
OP a point to keep in mind is in recent titles the R9 290X has been competing with GTX 980 as you must have seen in performance reviews of Ryse Son of Rome, Middle Earth Shadow of Mordor, Alien Isolation, Civilization Beyond Earth etc. . The R9 290X at USD 329 - USD 369 is still a very good card.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814202079
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814150696
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814202079
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814150696
Wha..?! Historically the reverse has been true. Both AMD and Nvidia have incremental driver performance gains over time, it is not reversed after a new driver release. That statement is so preposterous that I hope you can show some actual examples of that. Links please showing driver performance reversals! Can imagine a massive wave of facepalms reverberating in VC&G at that 5% comment, lol.
The 970 is about equal to the 290x (ref card vs ref card) up to 2560x1600, at 4k the 290x is only slightly ahead, certainly not 10%. Aftermarket 290x would be faster than 970 reference (the sort of comparison some people like to make
) but would be in same ballpark as aftermarket 970. In a cross-comparison of several reviews the 970 is 'generally' ahead.http://www.3dcenter.org/artikel/lau...ch-analyse-nvidia-geforce-gtx-970-980-seite-4
You make a very good point.
There is definitely a case for R290/X being good in more games in the long run due to.. cross-development on PC/consoles (all with radeons). Then there's Mantle, which is enjoying a long time under the sun until DX12 becomes mainstream.
Right now. I had a bunch of crashes with my 7950 on 14.9 (BF4 especially) and I reverted to 14.4 and everything was fine.
I don't think I've tried 14.9.1 though, that might be better.
Keysplayr
Elite Member
- Jan 16, 2003
- 21,219
- 54
- 91
no
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8568/the-geforce-gtx-970-review-feat-evga/4
Trade blows. And this article was with
NVIDIA Release 344.07 Beta
NVIDIA Release 344.16 Beta
Drivers
Gtx 970 big time. I owned a R9 290 Vapor-X for about a year and was pleased but they lose value so quickly that I will not consider them much in the futur but the quality is there. NV prove to keep a fair risidual value and consistance.
RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
NV keeps value? This may be true in select markets but not US. $500 480 for $175 1.5 years later, $650 780 for $280 1.5 years later, $700 780Ti for $360 1 year later, $3k Titan Z for $1K used less than 1 year later, $450 770 4GB can hardly be sold for $250 1 year later. You can now get 4X Titans in 4x$230 MSI gaming R9 290 when a single Titan cost $1K February 2013.
All cards lose value and flagship NV cards lose the most value by far! If you bought R9 290X during mining craze when it was $549, of course you overpaid. Plus it was a new card.
Right now you can get dual MSI Gaming R9 290s for $110 more over a single MSI gaming 970. At 1440p, that's 60-80% more performance for $110. NV can't touch that at all.
http://m.newegg.com/Product/index?itemnumber=14-127-774
There is no way a 970 is worth $110-130 more over a 290 unless you have a very specific case such as 3D Vision or cannot possibly live without PhysX. Most people buy NV because "AMD drivers are horrible" from year 2002. Every new AMD and NV driver there are always issues unaddressed with some game in the world.
$350 970 with 5-10% more performance vs. $230 290
$460 290s with 60-80% more performamnce at 1440p vs. $360 970
Sorry but at these prices at 1440p when you need extra power it's nearly impossible to objectively recommend the 970.
Last edited:
guskline
Diamond Member
- Apr 17, 2006
- 5,338
- 476
- 126
To respond to The OPs question. and perhaps amplify the points of RussianSensation let me start by saying in addition to my rig listed below, I also am running a 3770k @4.5 Ghz with 2 EVGA GTX 670 FTWs in SLI and a FX8350 @4.5 GHZ with a EVGA GTX780 Classified (both cpu and gpu custom watercooled). I don't make these comments to brag, rather to hopefully avoid the accusation that I am AMD "fanboy" because of my rig below. I had exclusively owned Nvidia cards for quite sometime. My single GTX780 Classified with waterblock served me well in my rig below. However, I wanted to go SLI and at the time there was no release of the GTX980/970. I had been fascinated by the Hawaii chip (290X/290) but, due to the mining craze they were way overpriced.
At the time, I had a PNY GTX680 in my FX8350 rig -solid gpu. I found a Sapphire Tri-X R9-290 (not 290X) on ebay for @$290 delivered. I would have had to pay almost $700 for a second GTX Classified with a waterblock. I decided to sell the GTX680 and purchase the R9 290. My out of pocket was less than $100. After experiencing the performance of the R9 290, that started the ball rolling toward purchasing a second and running them CF in my rig below. I found the R9 290, and especially the Sapphire Tri-X was a solid card, noticeably faster than the 680 and very close to my Highly OC'd 780 (core at 1300 since WC'd). In addition, with 4k monitors on the Horizon, the 4 Gigs Vram of the R9 290 made it very attractive.
I found another Sapphire Tri-X R9 290 for about the same price and decided to go CF in the rig below. Had to buy 2 EK blocks (got good deal @$230 total) and I was able to move my 780 Classified into my FX8350 rig and run 2 of the 290s in my rig below. BEST decision I have made in a long while and really sets me up nicely if I opt for a 4k monitor.
No doubt the 970/ 980 have made an impact. For the $$$ the 970 is not a bad decision. Price wise, this morning the least expensive available 970 on Newegg was @$350 yet the XFX Double dissipation 290X (not just 290) was the same price.
My point is that on pricing vs features the battle is so close it's hard to call.
I have had some issues at first playing COD Ghost MP with the CF 290s. It appears COD does not like CF. It works OK for me. In every other game, Bioshock, Metro, BF4 IL2 BOS, my CF 290s really shine.
this is no knock at my 670s or single 780 just my observations.
At the time, I had a PNY GTX680 in my FX8350 rig -solid gpu. I found a Sapphire Tri-X R9-290 (not 290X) on ebay for @$290 delivered. I would have had to pay almost $700 for a second GTX Classified with a waterblock. I decided to sell the GTX680 and purchase the R9 290. My out of pocket was less than $100. After experiencing the performance of the R9 290, that started the ball rolling toward purchasing a second and running them CF in my rig below. I found the R9 290, and especially the Sapphire Tri-X was a solid card, noticeably faster than the 680 and very close to my Highly OC'd 780 (core at 1300 since WC'd). In addition, with 4k monitors on the Horizon, the 4 Gigs Vram of the R9 290 made it very attractive.
I found another Sapphire Tri-X R9 290 for about the same price and decided to go CF in the rig below. Had to buy 2 EK blocks (got good deal @$230 total) and I was able to move my 780 Classified into my FX8350 rig and run 2 of the 290s in my rig below. BEST decision I have made in a long while and really sets me up nicely if I opt for a 4k monitor.
No doubt the 970/ 980 have made an impact. For the $$$ the 970 is not a bad decision. Price wise, this morning the least expensive available 970 on Newegg was @$350 yet the XFX Double dissipation 290X (not just 290) was the same price.
My point is that on pricing vs features the battle is so close it's hard to call.
I have had some issues at first playing COD Ghost MP with the CF 290s. It appears COD does not like CF. It works OK for me. In every other game, Bioshock, Metro, BF4 IL2 BOS, my CF 290s really shine.
this is no knock at my 670s or single 780 just my observations.
Last edited:
wand3r3r
Diamond Member
- May 16, 2008
- 3,180
- 0
- 0
Crossfire is better on 290x than the 970 as it keeps up with the faster 980, at 4k it's no competition for the 970 (fps and smoothness). That could change if NV fixes SLI but it has been pretty silent about that with few reviews calling them out like they did with the 7970. If OP considers going dual card that may be a consideration.
Just think if you would have bought a Titan a year ago or a Titan Z three months ago. The GTX780/780Ti have dropped in value in a huge way. The reason is because the GTX9xx cards are out and AMD cut prices since they don't have a new part to launch right now. Nothing special about either brand, the 'next gen' has started to roll out, previous gen parts are less valuable now.
I think some view the R9 series as being harder hit in terms of resale value as prices were inflated for awhile due to the mining bubble. There was a good 2-3 months where a 290X Tri-X cost you $700+.
If you compare MSRP though, there's been around a 50% hit in resale value - which, is comparable to Nvidia as well.
but 290x dropped to 290$ to 300$ didn't it? so again it is automatically 290x. even anadtech agrees that everything under 300$ is auto win for 290 + 290x. common sense bro.
Leyawiin
Diamond Member
- Nov 11, 2008
- 3,204
- 52
- 91
For $100 less than either the GTX 970 or R9 290X the R9 290 is pretty compelling. Only about 5-10% slower.
Temporarily. Its back up to about GTX 970 prices again.
Temporarily. Its back up to about GTX 970 prices again.
njdevilsfan87
Platinum Member
- Apr 19, 2007
- 2,342
- 265
- 126
With new R9 pricing I'd go for the 290 (non X) myself. You can get two R9 290 for the same price as a GTX 980.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter