• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

PurePC: GeForce GTX 970 vs Radeon R9 390 (Stock and OC)

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Silverforce11 said:
1569mhz 970 vs 1120mhz 390, about what I would expect.

This is a 1542mhz 970 vs a 1190mhz 390:

http://hardocp.com/article/2015/12/...directcu_iii_video_card_review/2#.Vt9TTPl96Uk

1450692089gP7yOsAJLZ_4_3.jpg


1450692089gP7yOsAJLZ_5_3.jpg


1450692089gP7yOsAJLZ_6_3.jpg


1450692089gP7yOsAJLZ_7_3.jpg


1450692089gP7yOsAJLZ_8_3.jpg


They ran with GameWorks in Dying Light which gimps AMD performance too.

ie. http://hardocp.com/article/2015/07/10/asus_strix_r9_fury_dc3_video_card_review/5#.Vt9UJfl96Uk

1450692089gP7yOsAJLZ_9_2.gif


Power varies a lot on the 390/X series due to different TDP limits in their bios.

1450692089gP7yOsAJLZ_10_1.gif
Click to expand...

One of my rigs has two R9 290x's in CFX. Both run at 1,250MHz (water-cooled). So I'm not sure why people claim that a 1,120MHz OC on a 390 constitutes an avg overclock.
 
Mahigan said:
One of my rigs has two R9 290x's in CFX. Both run at 1,250MHz (water-cooled). So I'm not sure why people claim that a 1,120MHz OC on a 390 constitutes an avg overclock.
Click to expand...

My R290X OC to 1.2ghz with vcore, on air. 20%. I had a lot of R290s for mining, some of them hit 1.2ghz, some of them hit only 1.15ghz.

This is the average clocks for the 390 on air:

http://hwbot.org/hardware/videocard/radeon_r9_390/

1174mhz.

This is the average clocks for the 970 on air:

http://hwbot.org/hardware/videocard/geforce_gtx_970/

1420mhz.

I kid you not, this is real life data.

So when someone presents results of a 1569mhz 970 vs a 1120mhz 390, it's clearly unrepresentative.
 
Last edited:
Silverforce11 said:
My R290X OC to 1.2ghz with vcore, on air. 20%. I had a lot of R290s for mining, some of them hit 1.2ghz, some of them hit only 1.15ghz.

This is the average clocks for the 390 on air:

http://hwbot.org/hardware/videocard/radeon_r9_390/

1174mhz.

This is the average clocks for the 970 on air:

http://hwbot.org/hardware/videocard/geforce_gtx_970/

1420mhz.

I kid you not, this is real life data.
Click to expand...

Well at those speeds ot is quite clear that the R9 390 is the better performer period.

Stock or avg OC wise.
 
Mahigan said:
Well at those speeds ot is quite clear that the R9 390 is the better performer period.

Stock or avg OC wise.
Click to expand...

What I can say, is Maxwell golden sample will clock a lot higher than GCN golden sample.

A golden 390/X isn't going to go much higher than 1.225ghz, but a golden 970/980 can go to 1.55ghz+. So Maxwell has higher maximum potential above the average.
 
Silverforce11 said:
What I can say, is Maxwell golden sample will clock a lot higher than GCN golden sample.

A golden 390/X isn't going to go much higher than 1.225ghz, but a golden 970/980 can go to 1.55ghz+. So Maxwell has higher maximum potential above the average.
Click to expand...

So it's like playing the OC lottery 🙂
 
Mahigan said:
So it's like playing the OC lottery 🙂
Click to expand...

Which is part of the fun being a hardware enthusiast right?

I'd imagine most of us here, get new hardware the first thing we do once it's installed, we try to crank the heck out of it to find that limit. 🙂

In this sense, I would say Maxwell OC is more rewarding, because you can get ridiculous high OC out of it if you're lucky. None of my 290/X have gone above 1.2ghz.
 
Silverforce11 said:
Which is part of the fun being a hardware enthusiast right?

I'd imagine most of us here, get new hardware the first thing we do once it's installed, we try to crank the heck out of it to find that limit. 🙂

In this sense, I would say Maxwell OC is more rewarding, because you can get ridiculous high OC out of it if you're lucky. None of my 290/X have gone above 1.2ghz.
Click to expand...

I don't overclock air cooled parts. I find that it tends to weaken solder points over the long run.

I had a bad experience with an 8800 Ultra whereas the card died. I had to place it in the oven to get it working again.
 
Why would a top of the line 970 compared to a mildly overclocked 390?

Remember msi's 390 can even do 1200 from the box

And most of the 970 struggles to get past 1500
 
Game_dev said:
The 390 is already just an over clocked 290. So you won't get much more out of it. For a midrange card you are better off getting a factory over clocked 970.

The rebranding has hurt AMD more than it has helped.
Click to expand...
The fact that since the rebranding AMD has started to regain market-share must be an anomaly.

I have to admit to getting a lot of amusement in reading your posts.😀
 
I think my MSI 970 gaming at +150 core aprox 1480 is a good oc and i felt lucky !

The purpose of this thread is imo damaging and predictive. And i think the 970 is a fine and efficient product that dont need all that oc and spinning to keep it a strong buy for many.

Anybody buying a 970 vs 390 in light of comming dx12 and especially asynch compute at this time - within spitting distance of new generation - because of performance not efficiency is doing themselves a bad service.

The 390 have proved to be far more future proof. And now is the future. Both play old games fine.
 
Game_dev said:
The 390 is already just an over clocked 290. So you won't get much more out of it. For a midrange card you are better off getting a factory over clocked 970.

The rebranding has hurt AMD more than it has helped.
Click to expand...

[citation needed]

It really depends. Will you have a hard time getting much more out of cards with huge factory OCs? No. Will you already be getting a lot of performance out of them? Oh heck yes.

And as far as the rebranding hurting AMD, look back to the deals forum before the launch, where RussianSensation was making a habit of linking to 290s going for as low as $230. That's 380X territory now and the 390 is going for $100.

The rebrand hurt AMD in the same sense that its cards underperform in recent and upcoming games, which is to say that the rebrand hurt AMD straight into a nice chunk of market share and a margins increase.
 
maddie said:
The fact that since the rebranding AMD has started to regain market-share must be an anomaly.

I have to admit to getting a lot of amusement in reading your posts.😀
Click to expand...

They lost marketshare in 2015 and they are expected to lose more this quarter.

https://www.jonpeddie.com/press-releases/details/high-end-add-in-boards-shipments-increased-in-2015-while-all-else-declined
 
Game_dev said:
They launched at the start of the 3rd quarter where their share dropped to a record low of 18%
Click to expand...

And when the Holiday season came around, NVIDIA's market share shrank and AMDs went up a bit.

The real test will be Polaris vs. Pascal.
 
Back on topic, this is about benchmarks, not market share.
 
crisium said:
Seems to be a bit of a golden sample for the 970 and a less than impressive Hawaii showing. That being said, they trade blows at 1440p which is an impressive feat for the 970 given its shortcomings.
Click to expand...

It seems to me that most 970's should overclock to about 1400-1450.
At that speed it is still very quick and puts it quite a bit higher in the charts.
The way the 970 scales with overclock is very impressive and for someone like myself that has proper case cooling and loves to overclock the 970 was an easy choice.
This is just my opinion :thumbsup:
 
1300MHz 980 to match a 1010MHz 390 in NFS? Damn, and that's not even a full Hawaii.


Another one that goes to GCN. It's insane. Gotta love having your architecture in both consoles with the newer engines tailored for it paying off in the long run!
 
poofyhairguy said:
It seems like the 970's limitations are going to really show their face the next year or so.
Click to expand...

you mean this year. 🙂 The 970 might be one of nVidia's most successful products ever but it sure ain't going to be a card to compete with Hawaii over the next 12-18 months.
 
thesmokingman said:
290x/390x looks like it is going to have the same lifespan as the venerable 7970 did.
Click to expand...

Hawaii will go down in GPU history one of the best GPUs in terms of longevity. Sadly due to AMD's poor execution at R9 290/R9 290X at launch with the ref cooler, the bitcoin mining rush and other issues such as power inefficiency wrt Maxwell and the DX11 CPU overhead this GPU could never match the market success of 780/780Ti and 980/970.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top