I've asked this before

[CreepX]

So I know last time I asked which one should I get , for 1080p , the GTX 970 or R9 390(Non-x), I know that the GTX 970 is 1-2% better at 1080p , but as I've seen some benchmarks in some games the R9 390 wins while in other the GTX 970 is the winner . I know this is kind of annoying , posting so frequently , but my biggest concern is that the 3.5 gb of the GTX 970 won't be enough for 1080 p in 2 or 3 years , what do you think ( Yeah , I know you don't have a crystal ball so you can't predict the future , but what about the past , how many years ago were 2 GBs enough for gaming at 1080p ?) I am asking this again as the MSI version has been released in my country and it's the same price as the 970.

[Razarza]

That will be plenty of VRAM for 1080p (there are a couple exceptions), just get whatever is cheaper or try to get a 290X for the same price.

[Litargirio]

So I know last time I asked which one should I get , for 1080p , the GTX 970 or R9 390(Non-x), I know that the GTX 970 is 1-2% better at 1080p , but as I've seen some benchmarks in some games the R9 390 wins while in other the GTX 970 is the winner . I know this is kind of annoying , posting so frequently , but my biggest concern is that the 3.5 gb of the GTX 970 won't be enough for 1080 p in 2 or 3 years , what do you think ( Yeah , I know you don't have a crystal ball so you can't predict the future , but what about the past , how many years ago were 2 GBs enough for gaming at 1080p ?)

 

Get a non-reference 290 (non-x, because 290 overclocks better than 290x and is cheaper) and overclock it. After all, a 390 is just an overclocked 290x.

 

Also follow your topic.

[HmmR]

trust me get 970 because

nvidia drivers are better

many games are nvidia titles

3.5gb v ram is enough

 

(sorry ik there will be lot of people who diagree but this is my opinion )

[blueballs]

go with the gtx 970 and in 2-3 years add another one so you'll get 8-7gb of vram with dx12 (w

[Dzzope]

So I know last time I asked which one should I get , for 1080p , the GTX 970 or R9 390(Non-x), I know that the GTX 970 is 1-2% better at 1080p , but as I've seen some benchmarks in some games the R9 390 wins while in other the GTX 970 is the winner . I know this is kind of annoying , posting so frequently , but my biggest concern is that the 3.5 gb of the GTX 970 won't be enough for 1080 p in 2 or 3 years , what do you think ( Yeah , I know you don't have a crystal ball so you can't predict the future , but what about the past , how many years ago were 2 GBs enough for gaming at 1080p ?) I am asking this again as the MSI version has been released in my country and it's the same price as the 970.

First of all.. it still has 4GB.. just 500Mb is acessed slightly lower bandwidth.. It's still Vram and MUCH better then going to system.. Also in 3-4 years 4GB will be the norm, not the low number.. 1080 won't have crazy high ram needs for a while at least as most people have less on their cards and don't upgrade often. 8GB for 1080 is insane unless your really loading up a heavily customized skyrim or downsampling from 4k or something..

 

Basically they are the same for you use.. pick the brand or product you prefer or price you prefer.

[Prysin]

So I know last time I asked which one should I get , for 1080p , the GTX 970 or R9 390(Non-x), I know that the GTX 970 is 1-2% better at 1080p , but as I've seen some benchmarks in some games the R9 390 wins while in other the GTX 970 is the winner . I know this is kind of annoying , posting so frequently , but my biggest concern is that the 3.5 gb of the GTX 970 won't be enough for 1080 p in 2 or 3 years , what do you think ( Yeah , I know you don't have a crystal ball so you can't predict the future , but what about the past , how many years ago were 2 GBs enough for gaming at 1080p ?) I am asking this again as the MSI version has been released in my country and it's the same price as the 970.

 

 

you got things slightly off

 

the pecking order for cards is

R9 390 > GTX 970 = R9 290X > R9 290

 

The differences between these cards are +/- 5%, but in general, 390 edges ahead of 970, while 290X is fairly matched and 290 slightly behind. The 290 and 970 has epic OC headroom, while little is known or documented regarding 390s OC headroom. 290X is a poor overclocker though.

[CreepX]

Get a non-reference 290 (non-x, because 290 overclocks better than 290x and is cheaper) and overclock it. After all, a 390 is just an overclocked 290x.

 

Also follow your topic.

 

That will be plenty of VRAM for 1080p (there are a couple exceptions), just get whatever is cheaper or try to get a 290X for the same price.

I see no reason to go for a 290X as the 290X=GTX 970= R9 390 when it comes to price in my country , and the prices won't go down ... also I don't like 2nd hand stuff , I don't rly trust them .

 

First of all.. it still has 4GB.. just 500Mb is acessed slightly lower bandwidth.. It's still Vram and MUCH better then going to system.. Also in 3-4 years 4GB will be the norm, not the low number.. 1080 won't have crazy high ram needs for a while at least as most people have less on their cards and don't upgrade often. 8GB for 1080 is insane unless your really loading up a heavily customized skyrim or downsampling from 4k or something..

 

Basically they are the same for you use.. pick the brand or product you prefer or price you prefer.

Well I don't think I will be installing 200 mods in Skyrim or something like that , and I think I will get a new GPU in 3 years , so , just like you said , I hope the GTX 970 will be enough until then .

 

you got things slightly off

 

the pecking order for cards is

R9 390 > GTX 970 = R9 290X > R9 290

 

The differences between these cards are +/- 5%, but in general, 390 edges ahead of 970, while 290X is fairly matched and 290 slightly behind. The 290 and 970 has epic OC headroom, while little is known or documented regarding 390s OC headroom. 290X is a poor overclocker though.

Well , I said 1-2 % because of this : http://www.game-debate.com/gpu/index.php?gid=2438&gid2=2264&compare=geforce-gtx-970-4gb-vs-radeon-r9-390

 

go with the gtx 970 and in 2-3 years add another one so you'll get 8-7gb of vram with dx12 (w

 

trust me get 970 because

nvidia drivers are better

many games are nvidia titles

3.5gb v ram is enough

 

(sorry ik there will be lot of people who diagree but this is my opinion )

Both the R9 390 and GTX 970 will take advantage of DX 12 in the same manner right ?(Considering they both have full DX 12 support )

[Elapo]

go with the gtx 970 and in 2-3 years add another one so you'll get 8-7gb of vram with dx12 (w

 

We don't know that for sure. It's possible, not confirmed.

 

Both the R9 390 and GTX 970 will take advantage of DX 12 in the same manner right ?(Considering they both have full DX 12 support )

 

Yes, but that'd leave you with 8 vs 7GB of Vram, which even then probably still doesn't matter, certainly not for 1080P.

[CreepX]

We don't know that for sure. It's possible, not confirmed.

 

 

Yes, but that'd leave you with 8 vs 7GB of Vram, which even then probably still doesn't matter, certainly not for 1080P.

7 GB , I thought if you SLI 2 cards that doesn't mean you get the same ammount of VRam combined , it's just that the VRam usage would get lower , right ? Or am I completely wrong ?

[Prysin]

I see no reason to go for a 290X as the 290X=GTX 970= R9 390 when it comes to price in my country , and the prices won't go down ... also I don't like 2nd hand stuff , I don't rly trust them .

 

Well I don't think I will be installing 200 mods in Skyrim or something like that , and I think I will get a new GPU in 3 years , so , just like you said , I hope the GTX 970 will be enough until then .

 

Well , I said 1-2 % because of this : http://www.game-debate.com/gpu/index.php?gid=2438&gid2=2264&compare=geforce-gtx-970-4gb-vs-radeon-r9-390

 

 

Both the R9 390 and GTX 970 will take advantage of DX 12 in the same manner right ?(Considering they both have full DX 12 support )

 

 

That is the worst comparison site ive ever seen. It only shows uninformative numbers and "check" marks all over the place without showing actual performance in any category, or how they even rated the cards in those categories in the first place.

[CreepX]

That is the worst comparison site ive ever seen. It only shows uninformative numbers and "check" marks all over the place without showing actual performance in any category, or how they even rated the cards in those categories in the first place.

Is there any other reliable review site besides Tom's Hardware ?

[Elapo]

7 GB , I thought if you SLI 2 cards that doesn't mean you get the same ammount of VRam combined , it's just that the VRam usage would get lower , right ? Or am I completely wrong ?

You could be right on that, though it still shouldn't matter too much.

[CreepX]

You could be right on that, though it still shouldn't matter too much.

Hmm , and I've also heard that SLI has certain problems in some games , will DX 12 fix that problem in games that support DX 12?(Just in case you know , I know no one can predict the future )

[Elapo]

Hmm , and I've also heard that SLI has certain problems in some games , will DX 12 fix that problem in games that support DX 12?(Just in case you know , I know no one can predict the future )

 

No idea. I suspect It'll introduce more problems if anything, if they are indeed going to be using split frame rendering, but so does every new technology.

[Prysin]

Is there any other reliable review site besides Tom's Hardware ?

Anandtech, OC3D (overclockers UK i think), Toms is quite good, but read their articles completely, Linuses videos on YT, Paul from Newegg at Pauls Hardware, Jayztwocents (youtube)

 

Now, Anandtech also has this neat benchmarking tool on the site, under Bench, that allows you to compare two specific GPUs, CPUs, motherboards, SSDs etc... It really is neat, and Anandtech, while a bit slow to review, is exceptionally picky with details and they dig really deep in most of their reviews, like down to the PCB fabrication deep.

[CreepX]

Anandtech, OC3D (overclockers UK i think), Toms is quite good, but read their articles completely, Linuses videos on YT, Paul from Newegg at Pauls Hardware, Jayztwocents (youtube)

 

Now, Anandtech also has this neat benchmarking tool on the site, under Bench, that allows you to compare two specific GPUs, CPUs, motherboards, SSDs etc... It really is neat, and Anandtech, while a bit slow to review, is exceptionally picky with details and they dig really deep in most of their reviews, like down to the PCB fabrication deep.

Well , I watch Jayz's and Linus' videos regularly , so I will check Anandtech , and I've also seen some of OC3D's vids.

[CreepX]

Anandtech, OC3D (overclockers UK i think), Toms is quite good, but read their articles completely, Linuses videos on YT, Paul from Newegg at Pauls Hardware, Jayztwocents (youtube)

 

Now, Anandtech also has this neat benchmarking tool on the site, under Bench, that allows you to compare two specific GPUs, CPUs, motherboards, SSDs etc... It really is neat, and Anandtech, while a bit slow to review, is exceptionally picky with details and they dig really deep in most of their reviews, like down to the PCB fabrication deep.

Can't seem to be able to compare the R9 390 to the GTX 970 on Anandtech? Or am I stupid ?

[Razarza]

I see no reason to go for a 290X as the 290X=GTX 970= R9 390 when it comes to price in my country , and the prices won't go down ... also I don't like 2nd hand stuff , I don't rly trust them .

That's a valid argument, just go for whatever is cheaper for you then the 970 or 390.

 

Edit - See my recent reply

[Litargirio]

I see no reason to go for a 290X as the 290X=GTX 970= R9 390 when it comes to price in my country , and the prices won't go down ... also I don't like 2nd hand stuff , I don't rly trust them .

That's a valid argument, just go for whatever is cheaper for you then the 970 or 390.

 

It's not a valid argument.

 

970 = 290X, and yet you say that you see no reason to go with 290X. You make no sense. To put it into perspective, you could've also said: since 290X equals 970, I see no reason to go with 970. Which wouldn't have made any sense either.

 

If both are equal, how come you "see no reason to go with 290X"?

[Prysin]

It's not a valid argument.

 

970 = 290X, and yet you say that you see no reason to go with 290X. You make no sense. To put it into perspective, you could've also said: since 290X equals 970, I see no reason to go with 970. Which wouldn't have made any sense either.

 

If both are equal, how come you "see no reason to go with 290X"?

 

 

Because some people have this fictional idea that NVIDIA drivers are somewhat way more glorious then AMD, like way more. And truth be told, THEIR NOT. NVIDIA proved this by releasing shitty drivers for almost 2 months now, drivers that made peoples PCs not only NOT play games, but shut down during browsing.... Now that is proper failure, the real failure wasnt that they screwd up, but that the following one or two drivers that was meant to fix the issue only made things worse, or didnt do jack shit. They have since fixed this issue, but it goes to show that Nvidias driver team is nothing more special then ANY other driver team. The end.

 

People say GTX 970 because Nvidia.... nothing else. Their whole argument, in most cases, is based 100% on "because Nvidia"....

 

I do wonder, are these the same people who buy an iphone because apple?

 

@CreepX

Some cards arent added to their database yet. I cannot tell you why, or when it will be added.

 

EDIT:

Also note that the GTX 970 used by Anandtechs benchmark tool is a non reference EVGA FTW with ACX cooler. Yes it has reference bios on it. But that cooler changes things up. While all AMD cards, well, 90% of them. Is using AMDs shitty reference cooler which is so shit that some cards struggle to run properly. Not to mention that you gotta be digging around for quite some time to still find a place selling reference AMD cards. Most cards are made and sold by vendors, and these cards are FAR from flawed.

[Razarza]

It's not a valid argument.

 

970 = 290X, and yet you say that you see no reason to go with 290X. You make no sense. To put it into perspective, you could've also said: since 290X equals 970, I see no reason to go with 970. Which wouldn't have made any sense either.

 

If both are equal, how come you "see no reason to go with 290X"?

 Whoa, what the fuck was I thinking, that comment was almost the first thing I did after waking up. I really should have waken up properly before that. Thanks for pointing that out.

 

OP if you can find a brand new 290X for the same price as a 970 or 390 get the 290X.

[Litargirio]

-snip-

 

Truer words have never been spoken.

[CreepX]

It's not a valid argument.

 

970 = 290X, and yet you say that you see no reason to go with 290X. You make no sense. To put it into perspective, you could've also said: since 290X equals 970, I see no reason to go with 970. Which wouldn't have made any sense either.

 

If both are equal, how come you "see no reason to go with 290X"?

I said they're equal in price , and I see no reason to get the 290X as  the 390 (As you said it ) is an overclocked version of the 290X ... so why not get that , as they have the exact same price ?

[FaZe Booce]

3.5gb is plenty for 1080. Don't fall into the myth that it is a bad card just because of that issue. If there is a cheaper 290x try to get that though.