[Newegg] Sapphire Tri-X R9 290 - $240 AR

[SteveGrabowski]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202143

Haven't seen a deal this good on the Tri-X ever

 

[jdoggg12]

As a historically Nvidia-centric gfx owner, what would the comparable Nvidia be? First result on google was R9 290 vs GTX 970 and the 970 had better performance at 50% the power usage?

EDIT - looks like 970 is hovering around $299, sorry

 

[SteveGrabowski]

As a historically Nvidia-centric gfx owner, what would the comparable Nvidia be? First result on google was R9 290 vs GTX 970 and the 970 had better performance at 50% the power usage?

EDIT - looks like 970 is hovering around $299, sorry

Where are you finding GTX 970s for $300?

 

[jdoggg12]

Where are you finding GTX 970s for $300?

It was at $300, now at $313 from B&H via google search for gtx 970 and going to the shopping section.

 

[soccerballtux]

Where are you finding GTX 970s for $300?

even at $300 this is $240 hard to see why I should get the GTX 970.

besides the GTX 970s are going for $330.

this 512bit bus really has me drooling. My Soyo Topaz S display's power supply just went and I started looking into some of those Korean 2560x1600 30" displays for $400 that you overclock to 90 or 120fps.

hm.... :O

at 120fps the CPU driver overhead on the AMDs has a me a bit worried though.

 

[WhoBeDaPlaya]

Nice deal on a Tri-X!
Better if you consider that you're getting 4GB instead of 3.5 + 0.5GB.

 

[digitaldurandal]

First result on google was R9 290 vs GTX 970 and the 970 had better performance at 50% the power usage?

Per Anandtech review of 970.

Power consumption
idle 970 76
idle 290 87
load 970 (crysis 3) 300
load 290 (crysis 3) 365

at 313 vs 240 it is about 30% more expensive and uses 20% less power under load and gets between 0 - 10% better frames depending on the game

If you ran Crysis 3 all day for a year the 970 would save you 60 bucks. So could be worth it if you play all day every day.

Does the 970 come with The Witcher 3 and would it be a first day purchase for you? Could be a factor as well.

 

[Headfoot]

As a historically Nvidia-centric gfx owner, what would the comparable Nvidia be? First result on google was R9 290 vs GTX 970 and the 970 had better performance at 50% the power usage?

EDIT - looks like 970 is hovering around $299, sorry

Wow no man totally, completely wrong. It's nowhere near 50% difference. In actual gaming a 290 uses 40-60w more, which amounts to exactly squat in the real world if your PSU can handle it. 970's aren't $300. If you can find one for $300 please link. They're all still $330, I saw one at $320 AR. The 970 is not very much faster, and uses 10-20% less power depending on the particular model (remember, there's no reference 970).

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2405548

Reviews of the power consumption and frame rates of stock 290's do not apply to aftermarket 290s. They are really quite a bit better. Stock 290s run at a higher default voltage, throttle by default, run hotter (=more power consumption), and are louder. The stock reviews are from 2013, and the driver and games situation is markedly different now, than it was then. The aftermarket ones are literally noticeably better in every way. That review is from Oct 2014.

Note that review is at 4k -- the 970 is going to grow a little faster relative to the 290 as you walk down towards 1080. It never gets more than 10% faster on average at 1080, and less at 1440, reducing to a mere 3% at 4k. The power consumption numbers are reliable there though.

End calculus: 970 is $70-80 more for 0-10% performance, 10-20% less power consumption. The Tri-X is the best aftermarket 290. This is hands down a better buy than a 970, no debate unless you need CUDA.

 

[funboy6942]

Well I found a 970 for $324 shipped, getting close to $300 with NO rebate......

http://www.compsource.com/pn/ZT9010110P/Zotac-3187/?src=PW

I have this one myself and overclocks like a beast...

 

[jdoggg12]

Per Anandtech review of 970.

Power consumption
idle 970 76
idle 290 87
load 970 (crysis 3) 300
load 290 (crysis 3) 365

at 313 vs 240 it is about 30% more expensive and uses 20% less power under load and gets between 0 - 10% better frames depending on the game

If you ran Crysis 3 all day for a year the 970 would save you 60 bucks. So could be worth it if you play all day every day.

Does the 970 come with The Witcher 3 and would it be a first day purchase for you? Could be a factor as well.

Since my computer is also my 24/7 video surveillance computer, power usage is a considering, albeit minor. (I have it setup to use the GFX card for some of the processing of video.)

Wow no man totally, completely wrong. It's nowhere near 50% difference. In actual gaming a 290 uses 40-60w more, which amounts to exactly squat in the real world if your PSU can handle it. 970's aren't $300. If you can find one for $300 please link. They're all still $330, I saw one at $320 AR. The 970 is not very much faster, and uses 10-20% less power depending on the particular model (remember, there's no reference 970).

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2405548

Reviews of the power consumption and frame rates of stock 290's do not apply to aftermarket 290s. They are really quite a bit better. Stock 290s run at a higher default voltage, throttle by default, run hotter (=more power consumption), and are louder. The stock reviews are from 2013, and the driver and games situation is markedly different now, than it was then. The aftermarket ones are literally noticeably better in every way. That review is from Oct 2014.

Note that review is at 4k -- the 970 is going to grow a little faster relative to the 290 as you walk down towards 1080. It never gets more than 10% faster on average at 1080, and less at 1440, reducing to a mere 3% at 4k. The power consumption numbers are reliable there though.

End calculus: 970 is $70-80 more for 0-10% performance, 10-20% less power consumption. The Tri-X is the best aftermarket 290. This is hands down a better buy than a 970, no debate unless you need CUDA.

There's conversation and there's being a jerk about it... your response is unnecessarily bordering on the latter. You're making qualifying assumptions and statements about my posts that are way off base. My power consumption question was related to energy usage and heat production since the card will be doing double duty as the workhorse behind the motion detection for my 6 x 3-megapixel IP security cameras... so in my rig, with a 550w PSU simply pushing an i7/SSD/2x3TB HDDs/8GB RAM/BlueRay Burner... no, I'm not at all worried that it can't handle it... but since it runs at load 24/7, i want keep it cool and not racking up my electric bill more than necessary.

I'm only passively in the market so I've not done much digging. My original post was based off of the first result I found when I searched for gtx970 vs R9 290 http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Radeon-R9-290X-vs-GeForce-GTX-970 which stated power usage at 148w vs 300w... that's where my power consumption comment came from. Also, Tom's mirrored the 300w potential http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-290x-hawaii-review,3650-29.html Again, keep in mind that it's not hard for 6 IP cameras to push a GFX card when multiple cameras are detecting motion... my old setup with 4 x 1MP cameras, running BlueIris kept my i5 2500K at 60% usage 24/7

When I looked on on the shopping page of Google, when i posted, there was a 970 from B&H for $300, then it went to $310 then up to $330. Right now, WalMart has it for $306 but tax kills it http://i.imgur.com/T7NAoqB.jpg or NCIXUS for $310 http://i.imgur.com/z9QuWCa.jpg