Which ends up being the better deal for a video card now?

[TemjinGold]

Confusing thought process but here goes (hope the numbers make it more clear)

1) I was originally eager to get a Fury X and get a 4k TV.

2) Fury X doesn't do HDMI 2.0 and 4k TVs that do displayport are limited. Plus with so much chaos, probably not the best time to get that combo now.

3) So plan is to hold out till the next node for that.

4) However, in the meantime, there are ~half a dozen games that my aging 580 cannot play well enough.

5) So the plan is to get a stopgap until then.

There's a $235 AR Powercolor 290 but I don't know how I feel about them (anyone have experience with their service).

There's a $260 AR Sapphire 290.

There's the XFX DD 290X for $276ish AR.

I see a Gigabyte 970 for $280 AR but I heard horror stories about their service.

I see Sapphire 290x for $325 AR.

I see some 390s for $335ish shipped.

(Anyone else see a deal I missed?)

So I'm pretty confused right now. What is the best deal out of that? I don't have a preference between red or green, I want the best deal for the money. Performance is first but I do care about power consumption (so if it's close, that will break the tie for me). Between Dirt Rally and Batman, I will never play Dirt. I'll play Batman but if I didn't get it with a card, I wouldn't buy it till Steam had it 75% off.

What do you guys recommend?

Forgot to mention: I don't OC video cards and if I hear back from you guys soon enough, I'll buy something this weekend.

 

[Azix]

Why 4K TV? Why not 4K monitor? When did TVs become the choice for gaming? You can get a fancy 144hz monitor with 1ms response etc etc so why?

If you have the cash I'd say 1440p monitor high refresh rate and a fury x or pro. Going 4K will eventually mean turning settings down to enjoy the game better, not ideal.

 

[TemjinGold]

Because I want something >50" I can hang on my wall.

 

[JDG1980]

The Sapphire Tri-X R9 290 got a very good review from Anandtech. It's perhaps the best AIB R9 290 out there, and I'd recommend going with it if you want a moderately priced stopgap solution and don't mind the power and thermal requirements of a Hawaii card.

 

[tential]

Why 4K TV? Why not 4K monitor? When did TVs become the choice for gaming? You can get a fancy 144hz monitor with 1ms response etc etc so why?

If you have the cash I'd say 1440p monitor high refresh rate and a fury x or pro. Going 4K will eventually mean turning settings down to enjoy the game better, not ideal.

Because not everyone cares about 1ms response times.... Some of us care about size.
Get over it, a pc isn't just for people who have pc gaming caves.
The fact that many of you have large numbers of friends you personally know who have pc gaming caves shows you need to expand your social circles a little beyond 1 type of person....

My advice op,
As a person who planned to do the exact same thing you did, I'd keep your current set if you have one. If not get a decent 1080p set on the cheap. Slick deals is your friend. Then, use the fury x to downsample 4k to 1080p. I honestly think the visual quality will be hard to tell from a couch and that it will be the same. And I set on top of my 70 and 80 inch screens. But I also have them already so that may influence my decision. Also though, for games you can't handle 4k in, you can downsample from lower resolutions and still maintain good frames and not have to play below a native screen res.

That's where I've slowly ended up after recovering from my initial anger of no hdmi 2.0 which is still the stupidest thing amd could do.

Obviously wait for reviews, but that's where I'm leaning now. If fury x is faster than the gtx 980ti even while oced then I'd rather have fury x and get better frames down sampling, than get a 980ti and still not be able to handle 4k.

 

[2is]

There are horror stories with every vendor really. Some are better than others, but considering this is just a stop gap you'll use for about a year, it's not likely you'll have to deal with service at all. Typically if there are issues It'll be defective right out of the gate, in which case you return it for refund/exchange. A less desirable brand may affect resale value, but I don't know how important that is to you. I say if you find a good deal, get it unless that particular card has overwhelmingly bad reviews.

 

[TemjinGold]

Good point. Based on what I listed (and also if you happen to know of any deals), which seems best?

 

[96Firebird]

Do you plan to sell this card when you're done with it, or re-purpose it?

 

[sandorski]

How much is the XFX 290X afr? Depending on the answer, it might be the best choice even if it doesn't get collected.

 

[boozzer]

if just a stop gap, why not buy used 290 for 180 or so. the money saved would go towards your 2016 purchase.

 

[happy medium]

Good point. Based on what I listed (and also if you happen to know of any deals), which seems best?

Yes I do. The XFX 290 DD 4gb with life time warranty for $299 -10%promo code EMCATKX36 -$30 rebate =240$ AR, free shipping. Has a nice cooler/heatsink. AT least $90 cheaper than a 390

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...on=r9 290 4gb&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=30

A close second choice would be the XFX 290x DD for 280$AR + promo code
A whopping 150$ cheaper than a 390x.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...50700&cm_re=r9_290_4gb-_-14-150-700-_-Product

Now its up to you. Is 6% more performance worth 40$?

 

[Silverforce11]

Powercolor R290 is one of the best, but its default fan is aggressive, like 60C temps but noisy, you can manual fan it and get Tri-X quality cooler for cheaper.

I agree with many here, R290/X (X when its below $300) is really awesome as a stopgap til 14nm.

 

[raghu78]

I would recommend the Sapphire R9 390 Nitro 8 GB. Its faster than R9 290X out of the box. The faster memory speeds seem to really help it quite a bit especially at lower resolutions like 1080p. Its got a fantastic cooler. 4GB extra VRAM. I would recommend the R9 390 8 GB over the R9 290X 4GB. my guess is in 18 months the extra 4 GB will fetch you a better resale value.

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Sapphire-Nitro-Radeon-R9-390-8GB-Review/Battlefield-4

http://www.eteknix.com/sapphire-nitro-r9-390-8gb-graphics-card-review/7/

 

[Silverforce11]

Good point about resale value. 390 being a "new" series with extra vram may retain its value more when you do jump to 14nm.

But is it worth $100 more than Powercolor R290? I would say no.

 

[ShintaiDK]

The 235$ 290 (unless its reference) or the 280$ 970. But if you plan on a 4K TV there is currently only 1 solution.

 

[raghu78]

Good point about resale value. 390 being a "new" series with extra vram may retain its value more when you do jump to 14nm.

But is it worth $100 more than Powercolor R290? I would say no.

here are the powercolor cards from newegg. the first one has a pathetic cooler and is just crap. the second one has a good cooler but is still loud and no match for a Sapphire Tri-X.

www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131624
www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131668

http://www.computerbase.de/2014-05/amd-radeon-r9-290-290x-roundup-test/3/

Tri-X and Vapor-X are a class apart for R9 290 cards. :thumbsup:

Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X 4GB for USD 284 (264 after rebate) vs Sapphire R9 390 Nitro 8 GB for USD 329. I would still advise on the R9 390 as its easier to sell relatively newer stuff and at better prices 15-18 months from now. As I said the memory bandwidth seems to make a good difference as even at same clocks we see R9 390 matching or beating R9 290X. So I still recommend the R9 390 over R9 290X / R9 290.

http://www.computerbase.de/2015-06/amd-radeon-r9-390x-390-380-r7-370-test/3/

As for people claiming the latest drivers are giving advantage to R9 390 pcper tested the R9 290 with 15.15 and inf hack. They did not see any significant improvements. So as I said the memory bandwdith is definitely pushing R9 390 to compete with R9 290X and GTX 970.

http://www.pcper.com/news/Graphics-...rformance-Check-Validating-AMD-R9-390-Testing

 

[TemjinGold]

Thanks. I do plan to resell when the time comes. The Nitro looks good but no one seems to have it in stock...

One other question: Does the 970 have HDMI 2.0? That might marginally tip things because I COULD end up changing the monitor before changing the card right before 14/16nm comes out.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Does the 970 have HDMI 2.0? That might marginally tip things because I COULD end up changing the monitor before changing the card right before 14/16nm comes out.

Yes. GTX960, 970, 980, 980ti and Titan X got HDMI 2.0. Else its only Carrizo that contains HDMI 2.0.

DP to HDMI 2.0 adapters should come out in Q3/Q4. But they are active and may cost a smaller fortune in the beginning.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

Don't buy the PowerColor TurboDuo R9 290. The PowerColor PCS+ R9 290 is excellent though, as is the Sapphire Tri-X R9 290. Here is a test of a bunch of R9 290s:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwRWi3Bz0qc

Note the Gigabyte Windforce he tested is the faster version. There is also a slower reference clock Windforce 290, and they both just seem to be called the Windforce R9 290. I wouldn't touch the Asus DirectCUII R9 290, I have read so many complaints about that card on tech forums.

 

[sm625]

I would wait until the right tv comes along, like the new Seiki 40U4SEP-G02. I'm thinking this will be under $500 by christmas.

 

[Termie]

The best deal when AMD releases a new card is always its previous models. This happens without fail every generation. It's as if AMD doesn't know what the street price on its GPUs actually is, and prices new cards against previous MSRPs.

The R9 290 Tri-X for $260AR is clearly a better deal than any 390/X, and is superior to just about every other 290 as well. Of course, it's been selling for around $260 since November, so it was a better deal 6 months ago than it is now. And supply is tight - it will definitely be cleared out in a matter of weeks.

Also, I've been gaming on a 4K TV via HDMI 2.0 at 4:4:4 chroma for quite some time. Takes a little luck to find a TV that will support it, but there's a bit of misinformation in this thread about that not being possible yet.

 

[guskline]

Termie Love my CF Tri-xs

 

[bystander36]

If the Fury X can't do what you want, why not get a 980ti?

There will never be a time that a single GPU will max out all games at 4K. Sure, in a year GPU's will get faster, but games will get more demanding. It is a never ending cycle. Either you lower your settings, or go with multiple top end GPU's.

Until dev's drop 1080p as the target resolution, this won't change.

 

[thetuna]

I literally just went through your dilemma last night.

I have a GTX 470 (with a 50% overclock...) and I want something with more oomph for Witcher 3, so I was planning on picking up a Fiji.

Eventually I decided that if I've waited this long I can wait one more year and see if NV & AMD can figure out all their HBM and AdaptiveSync and VR and port issues.

So, I impulse bid on a used 290x with a waterblock last night and got it for ~$250.
Hopefully this can tide me over for the next year

Do you have any opposition to going used?
This guy in the forum is selling some Sapphire Tri-X 290s for $210... you could probably talk him down a bit...

 

[guskline]

I literally just went through your dilemma last night.

I have a GTX 470 (with a 50% overclock...) and I want something with more oomph for Witcher 3, so I was planning on picking up a Fiji.

Eventually I decided that if I've waited this long I can wait one more year and see if NV & AMD can figure out all their HBM and AdaptiveSync and VR and port issues.

So, I impulse bid on a used 290x with a waterblock last night and got it for ~$250.
Hopefully this can tide me over for the next year

Do you have any opposition to going used?
This guy in the forum is selling some Sapphire Tri-X 290s for $210... you could probably talk him down a bit...

You won't be sorry . Rock solid chip.