AMD: Sapphire TOXIC 270X or ASUS R9 280?

[Phinixer]

Good day, everyone.

 

I find myself troubled with this question; I thought some would be able to answer it.

 

There are two cards within my budget I would like to purchase, though I cannot decide which it actually better since their price is similar from the vendor I am possibly willing to obtain one of them from.

 

SAPPHIRE TOXIC 270X 2GB or ASUS DIRECTCU II 280 ( Not x ) 3 GB.

 

- I have investigated their differences dearly. I honestly can assume that the Sapphire variant is rather more powerful, being considered the king of all of the 270x's. Although, the ASUS 280 is inevitably a tier higher in the product range... but if we resume everything down to specs, then the Sapphire variant results victorious - while taking some heavy losses, obviously.

 

I am inclined towards the Sapphire TOXIC 270x, but... the 280 has me intrigued. Which is considerably better? Or is the ASUS 280 just significantly better due to it's 3G? The Sapphire version of the 270X clearly shows some teeth and claws.

[RatedBlam]

I think the 270x is like a 7870 and the 280 is like a 7950.

Does that help anything.

Pure performance the r9 280 should win.

[harrynowl]

280

 

pitcairn to tahiti is quite a jump, 500 extra stream processors (like 40% more raw power) and also better mem bandwidth/bitwidth etc

[Manny Calavera]

since 270x would clock higher, the only thing that 7870 is better at is tesselation

 

get 280

[Phinixer]

That was my initial guess, but marketing finds a way into a consumer's mind...

 

I'll stay put on my choice of getting the ASUS DirectCU II TOP 3GB 280 (non-x) then.

 

Thank you all!

[harrynowl]

since 270x would clock higher, the only thing that 7870 is better at is tesselation

 

get 280

only just noticed a link to one of my posts is in your signature, although I'd add "single threaded" to the sentence 

[I/O]

270x is about as fast as a reference HD 7950.