290X Lightning CF VS Reference 780 Ti SLI VS 6GB 780 SLI

[TheDigitalRealm]

Just to clarify, I WILL be getting two GPU's anyway, so it's just a matter of which two. (Don't try and suggest a single 780 Ti)

 

So, for my first question budget isn't a concern, and I'll also be water cooling these cards too. I was wondering which set-up would be the better performer between the 290X and 780 Ti. when gaming with the LG 34UM95 or a similar 3440x1440 monitor? From what I've heard at >1440p, an R9 290X is the faster GPU. 

 

Okay, with the second question, budget is a concern. I have approximately £800 right now, and am able to get two R9 290X lightning GPU's for exactly £800. Would a GTX 780 6GB SLI set up be an equally compelling option? Or should I wait for more funds to buy two GTX 780 Ti reference cards for £1000.

 

Also, having come from an AMD HD 7950, I wasn't that impressed with the drivers. Do you think going with an Nvidia solution with (historically) "better" drivers, is worth any performance delta that may exist between the R9 290X and 780?

 

I would be over-clocking this set-up under water, so if you could, factor how well the card over-clocks. Also let me know if you feel this would be better answered with a poll. I would still like your input in the form of a reply rather than a vote though.

[Enderman]

Yes definitely go with 2 780tis, totally worth the price. Nvidia drivers are very stable, and I have never had a problem with them. Plus you get better CUDA acceleration, Shadowplay, and way higher overclocks. If you are not gaming 4k you really don't need that extra GB of vram that the 290x has. If you are gaming at 4k, a 6gb card will be the best option.

[TheDigitalRealm]

Yes definitely go with 2 780tis, totally worth the price. Nvidia drivers are very stable, and I have never had a problem with them. Plus you get better CUDA acceleration, Shadowplay, and way higher overclocks. If you are not gaming 4k you really don't need that extra GB of vram that the 290x has. If you are gaming at 4k, a 6gb card will be the best option.

No game has used more than 3GB except for Crysis 3....and I think it's more to do with the memory bus than it is the amount of VRAM when it comes to 4K gaming.

[GRJohn]

R9 295x2 beats two 780 TI's in SLI, so I expect two lightning 290Xs would extend the lead even further since they're clocked higher.
Plus you can overclock them unlike the reference 780 Ti which throttle's at 80c.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2014/04/08/radeon-r9-295x2-review-amd-delivers-on-a-promise-with-exciting-liquid-cooled-gpu/

[Enderman]

No game has used more than 3GB except for Crysis 3....and I think it's more to do with the memory bus than it is the amount of VRAM when it comes to 4K gaming.

Play minecraft with 3d models and watch your vram fill up to 100% on a 6GB titan black.

[Enderman]

Plus you can overclock them unlike the reference 780 Ti which throttle's at 80c.

You can change the temperature target to higher than 80 if you want. Plus he is liquid cooling them so there is no way he will even reach 80*C with an Nvidia GPU.

[TheDigitalRealm]

You can change the temperature target to higher than 80 if you want. Plus he is liquid cooling them so there is no way he will even reach 80*C with an Nvidia GPU.

 

I'd be pretty concerned if they were hitting 80 degrees using two 480mm radiators. Even taking over-clocking into account, I'll be buying R9 290X Lightning cards, which should over-clock very nicely, so factoring in the overclocked 780 Ti's, the lead should still be similar if not greater than the graph displays, surely?

[Analog]

I'd be pretty concerned if they were hitting 80 degrees using two 480mm radiators. Even taking over-clocking into account, I'll be buying R9 290X Lightning cards, which should over-clock very nicely, so factoring in the overclocked 780 Ti's, the lead should still be similar if not greater than the graph displays, surely?

 

I am concerned about when were these benchmarks made. The 290X Lightning is a very powerful card, but the newest nVidia beta drivers deliver up to 70% increase in FPS when in SLI. Since I updated to the new 337.50 drivers I have around 20FPS more in most of my games. The frame rates are also quite steady, with a pretty high minimum FPS. The GK110 architecture also responds very well to overclocking, unlike the older GK 104. Having said that I am not sure if the R9 290X Lighting will have much room for overclocking, because I haven't looked into that in such a detail. I would recommend that you go to the TinyTomLogan's channel - OC3D on YouTube and see his entire video on the 290X Lighting, since he does a pretty in depth tour of the card and it's performance. Other than that both configurations would be awesome for gaming. 

[Mateyyy]

290X Lightning is 2.5 slots. You should go 6GB 780 SLI, seems like the smartest choice from these 3!

[VSG]

I'd be pretty concerned if they were hitting 80 degrees using two 480mm radiators. Even taking over-clocking into account, I'll be buying R9 290X Lightning cards, which should over-clock very nicely, so factoring in the overclocked 780 Ti's, the lead should still be similar if not greater than the graph displays, surely?

The 290x lightning has been pretty disappointing overclocking wise. No real binning of the cores done.

[LmeAde2]

I would vote for SLI EVGA GTX 780Ti SC's http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00GJLUC8E. They will give you the best overall performance and SLI is more stable and better performing than Crossfire.

 

I love AMD cards for their value but when it comes to driver support Nvidia is the way to go and since you will be using a multiple GPU setup, you will need it.

[TheDigitalRealm]

I would vote for SLI EVGA GTX 780Ti SC's http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00GJLUC8E. They will give you the best overall performance and SLI is more stable and better performing than Crossfire.

 

I love AMD cards for their value but when it comes to driver support Nvidia is the way to go and since you will be using a multiple GPU setup, you will need it.

could you provide links to show it being less stable than SLI? Also, from the graphs I've seen, the R9 295X2 or CF R9 290X both beat 780 Ti SLI.

[TheDigitalRealm]

The 290x lightning has been pretty disappointing overclocking wise. No real binning of the cores done.

Dissapointin how? TTL got 1150MHz core and 6600MHz on the memory clock.. MSI realistically aren't able to bin Lightning GPU's without throwing away cards that under perform.

[TheDigitalRealm]

290X Lightning is 2.5 slots. You should go 6GB 780 SLI, seems like the smartest choice from these 3!

Could you elaborate as to why it's the better choice, given it is the worst performing choice Fps wise?

[VSG]

Dissapointin how? TTL got 1150MHz core and 6600MHz on the memory clock.. MSI realistically aren't able to bin Lightning GPU's without throwing away cards that under perform.

Check out the 290x lightning thread on OCN. Lots of people who found out the more expensive lightnings fared no better or even worse than reference cards as far as core goes. 1150 core is nothing to brag about honestly since reference AMD cards have unlocked voltage and a very good PCB. Memory is the only good thing for air/watercoolers but past 1500 MHz Memory people started getting black screens.

MSI could have just been in the lower performers in their Gaming series. Every brand that bins does this.

If you are going for that 21:9 1440p monitor, may I recommend two R9-290 cards instead? The Asus DCUII isn't great with the stock cooler but since you said you will be watercooling..

[Speadyjooce5]

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1187?vs=1073

[Mateyyy]

Could you elaborate as to why it's the better choice, given it is the worst performing choice Fps wise?

Because of the 6GB of memory. Games already need a lot of memory, and 3GB won't be enough very very soon. I wouldn't say 290X CF because 290 Crossfire will be quite a bit cheaper and you'll be getting pretty much the same performance. And not 780Ti SLI, because, I just said, 3GB won't be enough soon, well, some titles already use more than 3GB so..

[TheDigitalRealm]

Because of the 6GB of memory. Games already need a lot of memory, and 3GB won't be enough very very soon. I wouldn't say 290X CF because 290 Crossfire will be quite a bit cheaper and you'll be getting pretty much the same performance. And not 780Ti SLI, because, I just said, 3GB won't be enough soon, well, some titles already use more than 3GB so..

Leaving out game mods, the only game to use more than 3GB stock is Crysis 3 at 4K with AA at 4x, but yes, I see your point. Still, you don't present any reason 290X Crossfire isn't an option other than the 290 performing similarly. TTL got a 1650MHz memory clock with a 1150MHz core clock, and said that 1500nm is achievable with most reference R9 290X cards. I am more tempted to go for 6GB 780's than for the 780 Ti considering the resolution I'll be playing at.

Check out the 290x lightning thread on OCN. Lots of people who found out the more expensive lightnings fared no better or even worse than reference cards as far as core goes. 1150 core is nothing to brag about honestly since reference AMD cards have unlocked voltage and a very good PCB. Memory is the only good thing for air/watercoolers but past 1500 MHz Memory people started getting black screens.

MSI could have just been in the lower performers in their Gaming series. Every brand that bins does this.

If you are going for that 21:9 1440p monitor, may I recommend two R9-290 cards instead? The Asus DCUII isn't great with the stock cooler but since you said you will be watercooling..

I was really aiming for one of the top performing cards to be honest. Leaving overclocking aside. The 290X Crossfire still seems like it's the best performing solution, so is that the only reason you'd recommend against it? Others have suggested 6GB 780s due to the 3GB limitation of the 780 Ti. What do you think of this?

[Lays]

I'd be pretty concerned if they were hitting 80 degrees using two 480mm radiators. Even taking over-clocking into account, I'll be buying R9 290X Lightning cards, which should over-clock very nicely, so factoring in the overclocked 780 Ti's, the lead should still be similar if not greater than the graph displays, surely?

 

 

If you were to get 2 classified 780 ti and overclock them with custom bios it would surpass the 290x lightning CF tbh.

(Easily 1400+ mhz on the core, and ~8 ghz on the memory)

 

 

Don't even bother considering 6gb cards, it's 100% pointless no matter what resolution you're playing at. You need 3-4 cards to use above 3gb with playable framerates.

[TheDigitalRealm]

If you were to get 2 classified 780 ti and overclock them with custom bios it would surpass the 290x lightning CF tbh.

(Easily 1400+ mhz on the core, and ~8 ghz on the memory)

 

 

Don't even bother considering 6gb cards, it's 100% pointless no matter what resolution you're playing at. You need 3-4 cards to use above 3gb with playable framerates.

It's whether I can bring myself to spend £1100 instead of £800...

[Lays]

It's whether I can bring myself to spend £1100 instead of £800...

 

 

True.  To bad you don't live in the US where parts are cheap , I wish other countries didn't have inflated / overpriced PC parts.

 

I really don't understand this stupid fascination with 6gb 780's, (no offence) it makes zero sense to me owning 2 780s. I can barely get to 2.7gb of usage in Crysis 3 without dipping below 60 FPS, even with my cards at 1.325volts and 1320 mhz + 7600 on the memory. Adding 3gb extra wouldn't help when the cards aren't fast enough to load that many textures consistently.

 

I really wish marketing tactics like this didn't exist, but they gotta make money somehow I guess.

 

 

 

I think the only way to use over 3-4gb of vram you'd literally have to be killing your cards from over-volting in the process.

(We're literally talking about like 1600 mhz on the core and 8000 mhz on the memory, running like 1.5-1.6 volts through your GPU)

[DoubleA7]

R9 beats 2 780Ti's and if you're gaming on 4K, 290x is definitely better.

[VSG]

I was really aiming for one of the top performing cards to be honest. Leaving overclocking aside. The 290X Crossfire still seems like it's the best performing solution, so is that the only reason you'd recommend against it? Others have suggested 6GB 780s due to the 3GB limitation of the 780 Ti. What do you think of this?

 

Ya, more or less. Other than modded Skyrim and potentially Watch Dogs coming up real soon, not a whole lot of games are consuming the 3gigs or more on Vram but even there the 290s will take care of you. Once overclocked to the average 1100-1200 that they go on water (overvolted of course unless you get golden cards), those should well be the best performing cards in your budget. Depending on how well they are priced, you might well be able to get blocks for them too in that budget of yours.

[TheDigitalRealm]

Ya, more or less. Other than modded Skyrim and potentially Watch Dogs coming up real soon, not a whole lot of games are consuming the 3gigs or more on Vram but even there the 290s will take care of you. Once overclocked to the average 1100-1200 that they go on water (overvolted of course unless you get golden cards), those should well be the best performing cards in your budget. Depending on how well they are priced, you might well be able to get blocks for them too in that budget of yours.

I've already stated that two 290X Lightnings are in my budget, not including blocks, so they'd be the best performing cards in my budget, not the 290 DCU2 that you suggested. Thank you for the input though.

[TheDigitalRealm]

True. To bad you don't live in the US where parts are cheap , I wish other countries didn't have inflated / overpriced PC parts.

I really don't understand this stupid fascination with 6gb 780's, (no offence) it makes zero sense to me owning 2 780s. I can barely get to 2.7gb of usage in Crysis 3 without dipping below 60 FPS, even with my cards at 1.325volts and 1320 mhz + 7600 on the memory. Adding 3gb extra wouldn't help when the cards aren't fast enough to load that many textures consistently.

I really wish marketing tactics like this didn't exist, but they gotta make money somehow I guess.

I think the only way to use over 3-4gb of vram you'd literally have to be killing your cards from over-volting in the process.

(We're literally talking about like 1600 mhz on the core and 8000 mhz on the memory, running like 1.5-1.6 volts through your GPU)

I got that feeling when they announced them. It's great for people who can't afford a Titan Black for workstation applications, but for gaming it doesn't make sense. I think the 780 Tis that I'd need to buy to actually match/beat the 290X are just too expensive for my budget. If it were just between two highly binned GTX 780's and two 290X Lightnings, which would you recommend. Basically something like a 780 Lightning vs 290x lighting.