Is it worth spending an extra $50 from a 290x to a 970?

[cheeze_tartz]

290x = $280

 

970 = $330

 

Is it worth it?

[TheGeeker]

I would. 

[thekeemo]

not even close unless your power bill is through the roof

 

(also bullshit below this)

 

same fps 1080 same or better at 1440p better at 4k

[blu4]

Definitely. The 970 performs better at 1080p/1440p. Less power and overlocks better.

not even close unless your power bill is through the roof

Just stop, please.

[alphaproject]

Doesn't that really depend on the individual? Worth it? Hard to answer.

 

If you have $50 sitting around and you can spare it, then maybe it is worth it to go Nvidia. If you can't spare it, maybe it's not worth it.

 

Some gamers buy Titan X cards that are in no way "worth" it to me but it doesn't stop them from buying the Titan.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

Ehhhhhh no. The FPS increase isn't even worth it and the 290x beats the 970 in higher resolutions.  

[Enderman]

I would. Unless youre running 4k the 3.5GB issue should not affect you, and the lower power consumption, better overclocking, and lower noise are all great benefits in addition to the extra performance.

[CoolaxGaming]

Definitely. The 970 performs better at 1080p/1440p. Less power and overlocks better.

Just stop, please.

No, 290x is better in 1440 and above.

And no op

[Enderman]

No, 290x is better in 1440 and above.

And no op

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8568/the-geforce-gtx-970-review-feat-evga/4

 

[STRMfrmXMN]

Not worth the upgrade. It may be better for the right person when buying the card new, but it's nowhere near worth an upgrade.

[EvilWiffles]

Unless you hate the fact that AMD rarely releases new drivers.

 

The wait is unreal sometimes. The struggle is real with AMD sometimes.

That'd be the only noticable thing with R9 290x vs GTX 970 that actually makes a damn difference, it's the horrid drivers that take so damn long to come along.

[Guest Philosophy]

not even close unless your power bill is through the roof

 

(also bullshit below this)

 

same fps 1080 same or better at 1440p better at 4k

This. 

[cheeze_tartz]

Thanks for all the replies!!!! I guess i'll stick with the 290x. Plus I'm going to game on a 5760x1080 resolution soon.

[thekeemo]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8568/the-geforce-gtx-970-review-feat-evga/4

 

we can all agree this guy won this argument 1 fps diffrence + or - end discussion

[CoolaxGaming]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8568/the-geforce-gtx-970-review-feat-evga/4

 

I see the stock 290x uber beating the 979 half the time?

[gilang01]

Meh I would, since my psu can't support the 290x's MASSIVE power draw (o and electricity is kinda expensive in my country)

[Techhog]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8568/the-geforce-gtx-970-review-feat-evga/4

 

You do realize that this is using the thermal-throttled reference card, right?

[Enderman]

You do realize that this is using the thermal-throttled reference card, right?

The reference card does not throttle on uber

read the review

[maizenblue]

Those benchmarks feature a stock 290x with the horrific reference cooler that subjected it to thermal throttling. A tri X, MSI lightning or any number of other non reference 290xs would perform far better. I like to use BF4 as good all around benchmark that doesn't seem to favor one brand over the other, and at 1440p I usually see the 290x come out on top.

 

Anandtech is an OK site, its certainly not anywhere near as bad as GPUBOSS, but it does seem like in head to head benchmarks Nvidia cards always seem to fair better against AMD than they do on most other benchmarks(and in most own personal experience). Some of it has to do with their insistence on always using a reference 290x, which itself implies an Nvidia bias as most other sites recognize almost NOONE uses a reference 290x for gaming these days.

[Briggsy]

Those benchmarks feature a stock 290x with the horrific reference cooler that subjected it to thermal throttling. A tri X, MSI lightning or any number of other non reference 290xs would perform far better. I like to use BF4 as good all around benchmark that doesn't seem to favor one brand over the other, and at 1440p I usually see the 290x come out on top.

 

Anandtech is an OK site, its certainly not anywhere near as bad as GPUBOSS, but it does seem like in head to head benchmarks Nvidia cards always seem to fair better against AMD than they do on most other benchmarks(and in most own personal experience). Some of it has to do with their insistence on always using a reference 290x, which itself implies an Nvidia bias as most other sites recognize almost NOONE uses a reference 290x for gaming these days.

 

Just to add to what you said. The 970 Anandtech benched was a FTW edition that ran at 1400+ Mhz without any overclocking (I think it was 1410 or close to that, if memory of their review serves correct). Despite that, the 290 and 290x trade blows with it just fine at reference clocks.

[david cassar]

Don't forget that with the 970 you are getting a free game. If you want to you can sell it for like 40$ to make some quick cash. Edit: you're actually getting two games for free. If you sell them the 970 will have actually been cheaper than the 290x. Not only that but the 970 performa similar if not better at 1080p, runs cooler and draws less power. Also since its a Maxwell GPU it has tons of overclocking headroom.

[GlassBomb]

I would personally go with the 970. For the sole purpose of it being a little quieter during heavy use.

And it would be cheaper for me in the long run, as well. Since I am a Folder.

Really,though. The 290x and the 970 trade blows depending on the game, etc. Go whichever has the looks you want, or the bundled games you like. Or you can go AMG, because AMD. Or Nvidia, because Nvidia.

[Justhavocman]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8568/the-geforce-gtx-970-review-feat-evga/4

 

 is this a 970 ftw vs stock 290x?  Because if so , it's lacking 15% performance , get a benchmark of a Lightning or Vapor-X if you want a fair comparison .