GTX 770 4GB or 2gb or R9 280X 3gb?

[hardware_guy]

Hey, I am going to be building my pc in about 2 weeks but I am having second thoughts about my gpu now. Firstly I decided to go with a Evga GTX 770 2gb, but now seeing as watch dogs uses more than 2gb of VRAM, I was thinking to spend about £20 to get a MSI GTX 770 4gb,so the card can handle future games which will use more VRAM. But now I am also considering to get the R9 280X because it has 3gb of VRAM and it is about £70 cheaper.

So can anyone help me to choose between those 3 cards, the EVGA GTX 770, MSI GTX 770 or the R9 280X?

If I do get the R9 280X,will it produce loads of heat onto my case and will it perform the same as a gtx 770 2gb? And also if I do go for a gtx 770, is it worth to spend £20 more for a 4gb version.

Prices of the different cards:

-EVGA GTX 770=£258.92

-MSI GTX 770=£278.12

-MSI R9 280X=£204.34

[BloodWithIce]

Evga 770 2gb, because AMD cards are performing like crap right now with Watch_Dogs (for now). Or, get the 4gb one if you are planning on sli in the future.

[Flyguygamer]

770 is slightly faster. 4gb doesnt do much. I would get the 770 2gb.

[hardware_guy]

770 is slightly faster. 4gb doesnt do much. I would get the 770 2gb.

 

But i have beard that games later on will use more than 2gb of VRAM? Is that true, becasue i am think of keeping this card for at least 5/6 years?

[SymphonyX7]

Evga 770 2gb, because AMD cards are performing like crap right now with Watch_Dogs (for now). Or, get the 4gb one if you are planning on sli in the future.

Bullshit. The 2 GB GTX 770 won't even allow you to play Watch Dogs on ultra textures because of the measly 2 GB RAM.

Go for the R9 280X because of bandwidth and RAM. It's more futureproof. And it performs identically to the GTX 770 on Watch Dogs. You could also go for the 4 GB GTX 770, but it's pointless when the R9 290 is so close.

[Nickolas47]

Hey, I am going to be building my pc in about 2 weeks but I am having second thoughts about my gpu now. Firstly I decided to go with a Evga GTX 770 2gb, but now seeing as watch dogs uses more than 2gb of VRAM, I was thinking to spend about £20 to get a MSI GTX 770 4gb,so the card can handle future games which will use more VRAM. But now I am also considering to get the R9 280X because it has 3gb of VRAM and it is about £70 cheaper.

So can anyone help me to choose between those 3 cards, the EVGA GTX 770, MSI GTX 770 or the R9 280X?

If I do get the R9 280X,will it produce loads of heat onto my case and will it perform the same as a gtx 770 2gb? And also if I do go for a gtx 770, is it worth to spend £20 more for a 4gb version.

Prices of the different cards:

-EVGA GTX 770=£258.92

-MSI GTX 770=£278.12

-MSI R9 280X=£204.34

Hey, I am going to be building my pc in about 2 weeks but I am having second thoughts about my gpu now. Firstly I decided to go with a Evga GTX 770 2gb, but now seeing as watch dogs uses more than 2gb of VRAM, I was thinking to spend about £20 to get a MSI GTX 770 4gb,so the card can handle future games which will use more VRAM. But now I am also considering to get the R9 280X because it has 3gb of VRAM and it is about £70 cheaper.

So can anyone help me to choose between those 3 cards, the EVGA GTX 770, MSI GTX 770 or the R9 280X?

If I do get the R9 280X,will it produce loads of heat onto my case and will it perform the same as a gtx 770 2gb? And also if I do go for a gtx 770, is it worth to spend £20 more for a 4gb version.

Prices of the different cards:

-EVGA GTX 770=£258.92

-MSI GTX 770=£278.12

-MSI R9 280X=£204.34

Me playing watch dogs on ultra with r9 280x http://youtu.be/taApT1ADLeI

[BloodWithIce]

 

Bullshit. The 2 GB GTX 770 won't even allow you to play Watch Dogs on ultra textures because of the measly 2 GB RAM.

Go for the R9 280X because of bandwidth and RAM. It's more futureproof. And it performs identically to the GTX 770 on Watch Dogs. You could also go for the 4 GB GTX 770, but it's pointless when the R9 290 is so close.

 

Calm down turbo, just putting it out there.

[papeles]

ok so:

 

 CAN WE STOP TALKING ABOUT A CHOISE OF A GPU BECAUSE OF WATCHDOGS? THE GAME IS RETARDEDLY OPTIMIZED, HE SHOULDNT EVEN BE CONSIDERED HERE

 

(had to say it) 

 

Ot: both good gpu's. The 770 will give you more in terms of functionality (shadowplay, gsync soon, and few other goodies). The 280x is a hella good performer but because it's a rebranded chip you will be lacking stuff in the future, like freesync or whatever its called (i own one); and gives you +1gb of vram. Do not take into consideration watch dogs when making this choice. That game is retarded when to comes to working properly on a pc. I can run crysis 3 maxed out wile using less then 2gb vram and watch dogs uses 2.8gb vram. Just choose the cheaper

[hardware_guy]

ok so:

 

 CAN WE STOP TALKING ABOUT A CHOISE OF A GPU BECAUSE OF WATCHDOGS? THE GAME IS RETARDEDLY OPTIMIZED, HE SHOULDNT EVEN BE CONSIDERED HERE

 

(had to say it) 

 

Ot: both good gpu's. The 770 will give you more in terms of functionality (shadowplay, gsync soon, and few other goodies). The 280x is a hella good performer but because it's a rebranded chip you will be lacking stuff in the future, like freesync or whatever its called (i own one); and gives you +1gb of vram. Do not take into consideration watch dogs when making this choice. That game is retarded when to comes to working properly on a pc. I can run crysis 3 maxed out wile using less then 2gb vram and watch dogs uses 2.8gb vram. Just choose the cheaper

 

ok, so i just searched Ubisoft games up and found out that all Ubisoft games run retardly on pc. The 280X is cheaper here in the UK by about £70, so i might just get this one cause as you said "choose the cheaper one". I was thinking of getting the MSI one, is that ok for the 2080X or is it better to go for a different rand one?

[TERAFLOP]

R9 290 4GB is cheaper than 770 4GB and a bit faster than a GTX 780.

[SymphonyX7]

ok, so i just searched Ubisoft games up and found out that all Ubisoft games run retardly on pc. The 280X is cheaper here in the UK by about £70, so i might just get this one cause as you said "choose the cheaper one". I was thinking of getting the MSI one, is that ok for the 2080X or is it better to go for a different rand one?

I suggest the Sapphire-made R9 280X, although the MSI is also good. IMO, Sapphire makes the best coolers (among AMD cards) since they're an AMD-exclusive manufacturer. They only make AMD graphics cards. 

Both the Sapphire R9 280X Dual-X or Vapor-X are great. There's also the R9 280X Toxic edition, also made by Sapphire. However, it eats up incredible amounts of power (consumes as much or more than an R9 290)... but it's also the most powerful R9 280X around, capable of bullying GTX 770 cards. But in all honesty, I feel the added power consumption isn't worth the performance gains since it's still slower than an R9 290 despite drawing around the same or more power.

P.S. If you're getting the R9 280X Dual-X, make sure it has 8 + 6 molex ports. The old variant has 8 + 8 molex ports. You need to avoid the old variant because it's shoddily made. Aside from the molex ports, the difference is the cooler.

This is the new variant of the Dual-X:

This is the old variant of the Dual-X:

 

[papeles]

I suggest the Sapphire-made R9 280X, although the MSI is also good. IMO, Sapphire makes the best coolers (among AMD cards) since they're an AMD-exclusive manufacturer. They only make AMD graphics cards. 

Both the Sapphire R9 280X Dual-X or Vapor-X are great. There's also the R9 280X Toxic edition, also made by Sapphire. However, it eats up incredible amounts of power (consumes as much or more than an R9 290)... but it's also the most powerful R9 280X around, capable of bullying GTX 770 cards. But in all honesty, I feel the added power consumption isn't worth the performance gains since it's still slower than an R9 290 despite drawing around the same or more power.

P.S. If you're getting the R9 280X Dual-X, make sure it has 8 + 6 molex ports. The old variant has 8 + 8 molex ports. You need to avoid the old variant because it's shoddily made. Aside from the molex ports, the difference is the cooler.

This is the new variant of the Dual-X:

This is the old variant of the Dual-X:

 

this 100%, its the one i have. Silent, cool and good performer. That would be a nice pick.

[Tacitus]

Hey, I am going to be building my pc in about 2 weeks but I am having second thoughts about my gpu now. Firstly I decided to go with a Evga GTX 770 2gb, but now seeing as watch dogs uses more than 2gb of VRAM, I was thinking to spend about £20 to get a MSI GTX 770 4gb,so the card can handle future games which will use more VRAM. But now I am also considering to get the R9 280X because it has 3gb of VRAM and it is about £70 cheaper.

So can anyone help me to choose between those 3 cards, the EVGA GTX 770, MSI GTX 770 or the R9 280X?

If I do get the R9 280X,will it produce loads of heat onto my case and will it perform the same as a gtx 770 2gb? And also if I do go for a gtx 770, is it worth to spend £20 more for a 4gb version.

Prices of the different cards:

-EVGA GTX 770=£258.92

-MSI GTX 770=£278.12

-MSI R9 280X=£204.34

 

I wouldn't spend £258 on the EVGA, and I wouldn't spend £278 for a 4GB model. If you can afford the 4GB 770, then get this: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sapphire-TRI-X-Graphics-Card-PCI-E/dp/B00HFA44YQ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1401552738&sr=8-1&keywords=r9+290

Sapphire r9 290 tri-x for £284. It's just a better card.

 

If you'd rather not spend so much then get the 280x

[ACatWithThumbs]

R9-280X because it's cheaper.

And if you want the GTX770 go with 4GB vram.
2GB will bottleneck you especially with the new consoles having more than 3GB vram.
Watchdogs as an example is unplayable on Ultra with the 2GB version because you run out of Vram.
BF4 maxed out also uses 2,1GB which can cause stutter and huge FPS drops on some maps if a lot is going on.
 

[i_build_nanosuits]

do not buy a 2gb graphics card in 2014, unless you go with a mid/low range card...GTX 760 and up or R9 280 and up with AT LEAST 3GB of VRAM, 4GB even better.

[xAcid9]

Save up more money for R9-290. Trust me on this.

 

 

 

This one.

 

http://www.scan.co.uk/products/4gb-sapphire-radeon-r9-290-tri-x-oc-28nm-6200mhz-gddr5-gpu-1000mhz-2560-streams-dport-dvi-hdmi

[i_build_nanosuits]

Save up more money for R9-290. Trust me on this.

yeah that would be my suggestion as well...otherwise if your really need a card now and cant afford the 290 get a 280x but it really won't perform as good.

[hardware_guy]

I suggest the Sapphire-made R9 280X, although the MSI is also good. IMO, Sapphire makes the best coolers (among AMD cards) since they're an AMD-exclusive manufacturer. They only make AMD graphics cards. 

Both the Sapphire R9 280X Dual-X or Vapor-X are great. There's also the R9 280X Toxic edition, also made by Sapphire. However, it eats up incredible amounts of power (consumes as much or more than an R9 290)... but it's also the most powerful R9 280X around, capable of bullying GTX 770 cards. But in all honesty, I feel the added power consumption isn't worth the performance gains since it's still slower than an R9 290 despite drawing around the same or more power.

P.S. If you're getting the R9 280X Dual-X, make sure it has 8 + 6 molex ports. The old variant has 8 + 8 molex ports. You need to avoid the old variant because it's shoddily made. Aside from the molex ports, the difference is the cooler.

This is the new variant of the Dual-X:

This is the old variant of the Dual-X:

 

 

These are the options i have, except the last two, because they are just a bit too much. I am going towards the XFX R9 280X DD Black Editon, becasue of the clcok speeds and also towards the MSI R9 280X, becasue again of the clcok speeds and also the great price it has. The sapphire ones are just too expensive and compared to the other ones, they dont have as high clock speeds for the price.I wouldnt mind getting the Sapphire R9 280X VAPOR-X, but its just more expensive and its clock doesnt even reach at least 1000MHz.

[SymphonyX7]

These are the options i have, except the last two, because they are just a bit too much. I am going towards the XFX R9 280X DD Black Editon, becasue of the clcok speeds and also towards the MSI R9 280X, becasue again of the clcok speeds and also the great price it has. The sapphire ones are just too expensive and compared to the other ones, they dont have as high clock speeds for the price.I wouldnt mind getting the Sapphire R9 280X VAPOR-X, but its just more expensive and its clock doesnt even reach at least 1000MHz.

The MSI R9 280X Twin Frozr you listed is noticeably cheaper than even the Dual-X, the cheapest R9 280X from Sapphire. It's also slightly higher clocked than the Dual-X. I suggest you go for the MSI Twin Frozr instead.

Although if you do have plans of going triple monitor, you're better off with the Dual-X instead because it has two DVI + one HDMI. On the Twin Frozr, there's only one DVI + one HDMI. You'll need to plug the third monitor onto one of the mini DisplayPorts, and active DisplayPort adapters can be pricey. If you plan on gaming on just one monitor, the Twin Frozr will be best.

[papeles]

These are the options i have, except the last two, because they are just a bit too much. I am going towards the XFX R9 280X DD Black Editon, becasue of the clcok speeds and also towards the MSI R9 280X, becasue again of the clcok speeds and also the great price it has. The sapphire ones are just too expensive and compared to the other ones, they dont have as high clock speeds for the price.I wouldnt mind getting the Sapphire R9 280X VAPOR-X, but its just more expensive and its clock doesnt even reach at least 1000MHz.

you should look at the "boost speed". That would be the real clock unless the card overheats (wich wont happen). The vapor X has 1070mhz core, you interpreted it wrong. I've heard bad stuff about the latest xfx cooling solutions because vrm's heating alot (don't quote me on this). Also, if you are into overclocking, the saphire ones usually have unlocked voltages so u can tweak it a bit.

 

Anyways, looking at that msi price i almost came. Take it, its a rly good card.

[hardware_guy]

you should look at the "boost speed". That would be the real clock unless the card overheats (wich wont happen). The vapor X has 1070mhz core, you interpreted it wrong. I've heard bad stuff about the latest xfx cooling solutions because vrm's heating alot (don't quote me on this). Also, if you are into overclocking, the saphire ones usually have unlocked voltages so u can tweak it a bit.

 

Anyways, looking at that msi price i almost came. Take it, its a rly good card.

Alright thanks for your help, I'll go for this one then. Looks good, matches my Maximus vii Ranger motherboard and excellently priced.     

[hardware_guy]

The MSI R9 280X Twin Frozr you listed is noticeably cheaper than even the Dual-X, the cheapest R9 280X from Sapphire. It's also slightly higher clocked than the Dual-X. I suggest you go for the MSI Twin Frozr instead.

Although if you do have plans of going triple monitor, you're better off with the Dual-X instead because it has two DVI + one HDMI. On the Twin Frozr, there's only one DVI + one HDMI. You'll need to plug the third monitor onto one of the mini DisplayPorts, and active DisplayPort adapters can be pricey. If you just plan on gaming on one monitor, the Twin Frozr will be best.

 

Is there any difference between Display port and Mini Display Port, because i may be getting a 4k monitor in about a years time, will a Mini Display Port be able to handle a 4k display or will i need to use a DVI connection? And is the DVI port on the back of the MSI R9 280X DVI-I or DVI-D?

[SymphonyX7]

Is there any difference between Display port and Mini Display Port, because i may be getting a 4k monitor in about a years time, will a Mini Display Port be able to handle a 4k display or will i need to use a DVI connection? And is the DVI port on the back of the MSI R9 280X DVI-I or DVI-D?

Mini DisplayPort is merely a miniaturized DisplayPort. It's functionally identical to the regular sized DisplayPort. A single DVI won't be able to handle a 4K display. However, the DisplayPort will. The DVI port on the MSI Twin Frozr is DVI-I, which means you can still use it on VGA-only monitors via a DVI-to-VGA adapter.

As a side note, while the R9 280X is capable of 4K gaming, don't expect a lot. Chances are you'll forego AA and have graphics settings reduced to medium or high on newer titles just to get playable framerates.

[hardware_guy]

Mini DisplayPort is merely a miniaturized DisplayPort. It's functionally identical to the regular sized DisplayPort. A single DVI won't be able to handle a 4K display. However, the DisplayPort will. The DVI port on the MSI Twin Frozr is DVI-I, which means you can still use it on VGA-only monitors via a DVI-to-VGA adapter.

Ok thanks for that.

[Flyguygamer]

But i have beard that games later on will use more than 2gb of VRAM? Is that true, becasue i am think of keeping this card for at least 5/6 years?

Even 295x2 and titan z will have issues playing games in 5 years. Gpus last  2-3 for gaming.