XFX 290x @ 289.99 + games

[toyota]

But it's not.

This deal is $290 after it's all said and done. Most 970's I've seen go for about 350. Price delta is $60...plus you don't know about the shipping of the 970 (admittedly a minor comcern)...aaand there aren't any games with it. 970 is spanked here for value.

My ASUS VG248QE plays better with nVidia due to some features it has. I couldn't care less about the 3-d. But is my monitor a G sync monitor? Now *that* might be a solid value add.

I am really sorry that I missed out on the $220 HiS 290 with games that went on sale a few days ago. I've wanted an R 290 for awhile, and they really have fallen in price. I hope that maybe a quieter one like the MSI model will go on sale...

there is at least one for 330 right now. I had paid 337.50 shipped for my MSI 970.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8568/the-geforce-gtx-970-review-feat-evga/15

65 watts difference comparing reference 970 to 290x. At 15 hours of gaming a week for an entire year at 15 cents oer kilo hour work out to be $7.60 a year if you game that much.

Remember the difference is even smaller for none referemce cooler 290x parts or none reference slightly oc 970 parts

I wonder how much power that XFX really needs compared to the reference 290x from your link though, because XFX recommends an 850W power supply and says 750W minimum. Why does XFX have so much higher power recommendations than other aftermarket R9 2xx vendors?

 

[Deders]

@ $290 the 290X. It's an easy decision. I'm not sure which "more advanced features" people are talking about? AMD and nVidia have slightly different feature sets, but as to the 970 having more advanced ones, I don't see them.

Was mostly thinking of VXGI:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_E1oVl2d01Q

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9y_AVYMEUs

There is also MFAA which apparently halves the cost of AA compared to MSAA.

 

[positivedoppler]

I wonder how much power that XFX really needs compared to the reference 290x from your link though, because XFX recommends an 850W power supply and says 750W minimum. Why does XFX have so much higher power recommendations than other aftermarket R9 2xx vendors?

It's actually a tad better than the stock.
According to this one review, it's the same as a 780 TI under load.

http://www.legitreviews.com/xfx-radeon-r9-290-double-dissipation-video-card-review_138612/13
http://techreport.com/review/26092/custom-cooled-radeon-r9-290x-cards-from-asus-and-xfx-reviewed/3
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014...issipation_overclocking_review/7#.VFB66BA0_jk

 

[wand3r3r]

I wonder how much power that XFX really needs compared to the reference 290x from your link though, because XFX recommends an 850W power supply and says 750W minimum. Why does XFX have so much higher power recommendations than other aftermarket R9 2xx vendors?

They say those numbers to be safe since not all PSUs are equal. I run 290x crossfire off an 850w PSU.

 

[Headfoot]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8568/the-geforce-gtx-970-review-feat-evga/15

65 watts difference comparing reference 970 to 290x. At 15 hours of gaming a week for an entire year at 15 cents oer kilo hour work out to be $7.60 a year if you game that much.

Remember the difference is even smaller for none referemce cooler 290x parts or none reference slightly oc 970 parts

Thanks for running the numbers to give some perspective.

Apparently on this board, it is a super important issue to argue over ~$8 of power consumption. Either that, or its a poorly disguised attempt to move the goalposts to a metric that favors their preferred brand. $40 less expensive, plus free games saves more money than $8 year increased power consumption until roughly year 6. Those are the facts.

If anyone cares to make an actually convincing argument for the 970, focus on things that actually make any difference. You seem a lot more credible that way. For example, the new AA techniques, in home streaming, gsync and CUDA are actual value adds. Some people might even be into the Geforce Experience thing. Maxwell apparently is a beast at some of the newer crypto algorithms with the updates to CUDA too.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

They say those numbers to be safe since not all PSUs are equal. I run 290x crossfire off an 850w PSU.

So an Antec Neo Eco 620C (Seasonic OEM) shouldn't have any problem running that XFX 290x at full load with an i5 Haswell, 3 hard drives, and a grip of fans? The PSU claims 48A/576W continuous power on the 12V rail.

 

[kawi6rr]

Thanks for running the numbers to give some perspective.

Apparently on this board, it is a super important issue to argue over ~$8 of power consumption. Either that, or its a poorly disguised attempt to move the goalposts to a metric that favors their preferred brand. $40 less expensive, plus free games saves more money than $8 year increased power consumption until roughly year 6. Those are the facts.

If anyone cares to make an actually convincing argument for the 970, focus on things that actually make any difference. You seem a lot more credible that way. For example, the new AA techniques, in home streaming, gsync and CUDA are actual value adds. Some people might even be into the Geforce Experience thing. Maxwell apparently is a beast at some of the newer crypto algorithms with the updates to CUDA too.

You get that a lot on this forum, anti AMD fanboys even when a great deal is smacking them in the face. Plain and simple, the 290/290x at those prices are to hard to beat.

 

[wand3r3r]

So an Antec Neo Eco 620C (Seasonic OEM) shouldn't have any problem running that XFX 290x at full load with an i5 Haswell, 3 hard drives, and a grip of fans? The PSU claims 48A/576W continuous power on the 12V rail.

Personally I would use that, I prefer to have extra but having watched the power usage of around 700w with 290x crossfire/4770k/5hdds etc. then I believe you'll be fine with a single card and a 600w psu with some room to spare. If you start overvolting anything power usage will skyrocket. Oh yeah, the 700 or so watts includes my monitors.

 

[boozzer]

You get that a lot on this forum, anti AMD fanboys even when a great deal is smacking them in the face. Plain and simple, the 290/290x at those prices are to hard to beat.

I don't think they are fanboys, more like they bought it, so they have to recomend it, with the same reasons why they bought it, to convince others to buy, to make the bad decision less painful. that is just normal bro. there are super morons that tells potential buyers that the lower tdp would save them 50$ a year. hahahahahaaa. now those are different and deserve all the ridicule we can spare.

 

[Creig]

I wouldn't put much faith in the "Well, Nvidia cards hold their value better" argument. Remember the Titan? $999 price tag on release less than two years ago and it's no faster than an AMD 290X which can be purchased for less than $300 today.

So don't buy a card because of any perceived possible future "worth". Unlike stamp collecting, our hobby of video gaming does nothing but depreciate in value over time. And it doesn't take a lot of time at that.

 

[digitaldurandal]

I wouldn't put much faith in the "Well, Nvidia cards hold their value better" argument. Remember the Titan? $999 price tag on release less than two years ago and it's no faster than an AMD 290X which can be purchased for less than $300 today.

So don't buy a card because of any perceived possible future "worth". Unlike stamp collecting, our hobby of video gaming does nothing but depreciate in value over time. And it doesn't take a lot of time at that.

You chose the worst possible card you could. This is hardly indicative of the value the cards hold.

I bought my 670 windforces for 340 shipped brand new and can sell them for around 150. This is a card that is two generations old and has kept about 40% of its value. That is not that bad.

 

[Creig]

You chose the worst possible card you could. This is hardly indicative of the value the cards hold.

I bought my 670 windforces for 340 shipped brand new and can sell them for around 150. This is a card that is two generations old and has kept about 40% of its value. That is not that bad.

I specifically chose the Titan just to show a recent 'worse case scenario'. What I was mostly trying to get across was that computer gaming is not one where our purchases go up in value or even hold their pricing for any length of time.

When buying a video card, thinking "Well, it still might be worth X when it comes time to sell it" is a non-factor, in my opinion. Simply purchase the card you need for the games you want to play now and in the immediate future. Because you will have absolutely no idea what your card will be worth in the future when it comes time to upgrade again.

 

[Deders]

I specifically chose the Titan just to show a recent 'worse case scenario'. What I was mostly trying to get across was that computer gaming is not one where our purchases go up in value or even hold their pricing for any length of time.

the titan is definitely not a typical gamer's graphics card.

 

[Dannar26]

I realize that any piece of tech is a losing investment proposition.

But the same reason why it's good to buy AMD is the same reason why it won't resell well. If anything I was trying to give a nod to the green camp on this.

As a brand agnostic buyer I do think it's funny how hard nVidia owners will go to reccomend their cards. 1 or 2 frames I'll never see? 7 bucks more on a yearly electric bill? Some how these are reasons to spend so much more for nearly the same thing...

 

[wand3r3r]

You chose the worst possible card you could. This is hardly indicative of the value the cards hold.

I bought my 670 windforces for 340 shipped brand new and can sell them for around 150. This is a card that is two generations old and has kept about 40% of its value. That is not that bad.

The funny thing about your "better" example is that it's only 40% instead of 30%. Still quite abysmal resale values (which is well known and expected) and doen't really prove anything contrary to what he said.

 

[Leyawiin]

As a brand agnostic buyer I do think it's funny how hard nVidia owners will go to reccomend their cards. 1 or 2 frames I'll never see? 7 bucks more on a yearly electric bill? Some how these are reasons to spend so much more for nearly the same thing...

The price of the R9 290X is pretty much the same as the GTX 970 now (which are starting to become more available). I was looking around at at the big three (Newegg, Amazon, Tigerdirect) and the lower end for the AMD was $350/$360. Some have a $20 or $30 rebate "card", but that coming eight weeks down the road (if all goes well) isn't going to help you pay your credit card bill for the purchase right now. The games are nice, but it depends on if there are any you actually want or don't already own (Titanquest? Really?). When Toyota bought his GTX 970 it might have been less than an R9 290X.

As far as the electricy cost goes, its true that its not that big of a deal, but the extra heat dumped into a small room while gaming is (at least in the hot climate where I live it would be noticeable from May to September). But again, all things being more or less equal why would you buy the less efficient card? Maybe if it had some brand specific feature that you want that.

Oh, and a disclaimer - my current card is an HD 7950 IceQ that I'm quite happy with and have no plans to replace for another six months or so. I'm not a "fanboi" and I'm not trying to rationalize any purchase.

 

[Creig]

The price of the R9 290X is pretty much the same as the GTX 970 now (which are starting to become more available).

Not even close. On Newegg, the cheapest 290X right now is the XFX Double Dissipation model. $350 - 6% off instant code ($21) - $30 MIR = $299.

The cheapest 970 is $350. No instant off code, no MIR, no free games. Nada.

I was looking around at at the big three (Newegg, Amazon, Tigerdirect) and the lower end for the AMD was $350/$360. Some have a $20 or $30 rebate "card", but that coming eight weeks down the road (if all goes well) isn't going to help you pay your credit card bill for the purchase right now.

What's the difference? As long as you get the money it's still in your pocket. I couldn't tell you the last time I didn't receive a MIR that I applied for. Some people hate them and refuse to send them in, but that's entirely their choice. For those of us who take the time to fill them out and keep a copy just in case, it's a no-brainer.

The games are nice, but it depends on if there are any you actually want or don't already own (Titanquest? Really?). When Toyota bought his GTX 970 it might have been less than an R9 290X.

At least they're offered. And even if you somehow can't find a single game in the Never Settle bundle that you care to play or don't already own, you can still sell the codes on ebay. The free games still hold some sort of value.

As far as the electricy cost goes, its true that its not that big of a deal, but the extra heat dumped into a small room while gaming is (at least in the hot climate where I live it would be noticeable from May to September). But again, all things being more or less equal why would you buy the less efficient card? Maybe if it had some brand specific feature that you want that.

Yes, in small rooms or warmer climates, the extra heat could be an issue. I ran into that years ago when I gamed in a small extra room in our house. During extended gaming sessions I would sometimes find it necessary to open a window. But as you said, the extra electrical cost itself is minimal.

All things being equal, the more efficient card would be preferable. But things aren't equal. The 290X is just as fast as the 970, but is $50 cheaper and comes with a free games bundle.

 

[Dannar26]

The price of the R9 290X is pretty much the same as the GTX 970 now (which are starting to become more available). I was looking around at at the big three (Newegg, Amazon, Tigerdirect) and the lower end for the AMD was $350/$360. Some have a $20 or $30 rebate "card", but that coming eight weeks down the road (if all goes well) isn't going to help you pay your credit card bill for the purchase right now. The games are nice, but it depends on if there are any you actually want or don't already own (Titanquest? Really?). When Toyota bought his GTX 970 it might have been less than an R9 290X.

As far as the electricy cost goes, its true that its not that big of a deal, but the extra heat dumped into a small room while gaming is (at least in the hot climate where I live it would be noticeable from May to September). But again, all things being more or less equal why would you buy the less efficient card? Maybe if it had some brand specific feature that you want that.

Oh, and a disclaimer - my current card is an HD 7950 IceQ that I'm quite happy with and have no plans to replace for another six months or so. I'm not a "fanboi" and I'm not trying to rationalize any purchase.

I passed on the 290x this round. Mostly to see what deals stumble our way down the road. It's an interesting time for GPU shopping, no?

I did make that caveat earlier; steam eventually dramatically reduces cost of games to the point of trivializing them. I actually got titanquest a year and a half ago on a humble bundle. But still, I'm getting something. Something > nothing. The gold package has better games than TQ anyway.

I don't mind the rebate thing. I'm not so hard up for coin that I can't wait. All I'm concerned with is in the end, I come out ahead.


EDIT:

Looks like the R9 290 is probably the best bang for buck. At 1080p, I'd be fine with that right? Given the rest of my system (i5 4690k, 8 GB > 1600 RAM) , would I get above 60 FPS on most titles?

 

[RussianSensation]

Who cares about the 290X when MSI gaming 290 is $210 on Newegg after visa checkout coupon. MSI gaming 970 is $350. That's $140 you get to spend in Steam games this Halloween and Winter steam sale. The difference in heat and power is not worth paying $140 dollars for 5-10% performance difference.

 

[Z15CAM]

Are these Cards Reference PCB's? If so I would buy and go Koolance 401X's2 with an XSPC WB and say a Coolgate Rad and Noctuia Fans.