970 Vs 290x Help!

[badcable]

cannot decide between

 

http://www.ncix.com/detail/gigabyte-gtx-970-g1-1329mhz-1a-102011.htm

 

Or

 

http://www.ncix.com/detail/msi-radeon-r9-290x-gaming-df-92892-1229.htm

 

Or

 

http://www.ncix.com/detail/club3d-radeon-r9-290-royal-f3-94205-1509.htm

 

Apparently Amd's drivers arent as good as Nvidia's. Also my build is an Amd build which one should i choose? the 290x has an appealing price.

[Gofspar]

970 will win at 1080p and 1440p.

[Prastupok]

cannot decide between

 

http://www.ncix.com/detail/gigabyte-gtx-970-g1-1329mhz-1a-102011.htm

 

Or

 

http://www.ncix.com/detail/msi-radeon-r9-290x-gaming-df-92892-1229.htm

 

 

Apparently Amd's drivers arent as good as Nvidia's. Also my build is an Amd build which one should i choose? the 290x has an appealing price.

 

They aren't as good. But they are VERY close to as good. If you like the AMD, get an AMD. It performs very well, almost as good for a lot less cost.

[CoolaxGaming]

The 290x, there drivers have gotten a lot better and this a company that doesent lie.

Its neck to neck with 970 at 1080p and 1440p (Sometimes better) and definetly better at anything above 1440p

[Prastupok]

The 290x, there drivers have gotten a lot better and this a company that doesent lie.

Its neck to neck with 970 at 1080p and 1440p (Sometimes better) and definetly better at anything above 1440p

 

Please stop with the "Nvidia lied" stuff. It's getting old.

 

@badcable Either card will work up to 1440p. After that, you'll need 2 high end GPUs

[ANewFace]

970

[Sauron]

The club3D R9 290 just for the price the 970 isn't worth 100$ more than a 290x, not even close. Don't worry for the brand, it's a daughter company of the people who own powercolor.

 

There is almost no difference in driver quality any more. I passed from nvidia to amd last summer and i could barely tell the difference in the software. I had some crashes with AMD, but not any more than i had with my nvidia.

[Sauron]

-snip-

 

Maybe chill? He didn't insult you in any way or tell you to shut up. He kindly asked you to stop.

[Tacitus]

Both are more than enough at 1080p, the 970 is better at 1440p, and the 290x at higher than that res.

[TheSLSAMG]

The 290x, there drivers have gotten a lot better and this a company that doesent lie.

Its neck to neck with 970 at 1080p and 1440p (Sometimes better) and definetly better at anything above 1440p

 

-snip-

You're very naive to think AMD doesn't lie to you, and if you're going to tell someone to shut the fuck up, then do it right.

 

They got caught lying to/misinforming the consumer. But that doesn't mean no one else in the tech industry does, this doesn't turn AMD into some little angel of a company.

 

But then again, you're clearly an AMD fanboy, so of course there must be bias. And before you try it, in no way am I an NVIDIA fanboy. I do own one of their GPUs, but I am still as angry as any normal GTX 970 user would be.

[Prastupok]

-snip-

 

There have been hundreds of posts on the 970 "issue". It is old.

 

I explained this to someone earlier, the ROPS and cache weren't advertised to the public. They were sent to reviewers, and most reviews didn't mention ROPs or cache. I understand getting on the bandwagon is fun, but you are in the wrong. Misinformation and lying aren't the same thing.

 

Stop sh** talking about something that doesn't revolve around you. I didn't insult you in any way shape or form... Just know what you are talking about, and don't give misinformation like you have. You didn't listen to me about your build, but please listen to me now.

[Sauron]

Its called misinformation, which recently is in LTT a lot, Nvidia lied, people say dont say Nvidia Lied. Well guess what, Nvidia Lied. I stated a point, maybe he should stop.

 

Can you point me out where he said anything that could be interpreted as misinformation? And generally stating that "AMD doesn't lie" is pretty much as misinformative as anything. I can recall a couple of instances where they were as close to lying as they could get.

[Gofspar]

-snip-

And in 2007 AMD lied about ALL of their CPU's power consumption.

 

Get over it mang.

[Prastupok]

And in 2007 AMD lied about ALL of their CPU's power consumption.

 

Get over it mang.

 

From @TheSLSAMG ...

 

All companies lie, NVIDIA just got busted. - Jobbe03

[Prastupok]

@badcable

 

To answer the question at hand, of the 3, I would go MSI

 

http://www.ncix.com/detail/msi-radeon-r9-290x-gaming-df-92892-1229.htm

[Altecice]

The 290x, there drivers have gotten a lot better and this a company that doesent lie.

Its neck to neck with 970 at 1080p and 1440p (Sometimes better) and definetly better at anything above 1440p

 

The drivers have not gotten alot better. They still suck and the fact I (and many others using 290x's) are stuck on 14.7 drivers due to a bug with any later drivers is shocking. They need to sort it out before I will consider buying another AMD product. 

[Zweihander]

-snip-

 

This is funny.

 

And yes, it is getting old... Companies make mistakes, ya know?

[Sauron]

The drivers have not gotten alot better. They still suck and the fact I (and many others using 290x's) are stuck on 14.7 drivers due to a bug with any later drivers is shocking. They need to sort it out before I will consider buying another AMD product. 

 

Honestly I had none of those issues with my R9 290  :huh: have you tried purge uninstalling 14.7 and then installing omega?

[Dacoolioman]

Idk where you guys live but an r9 290x costs more than a 970 for me

[Enderman]

Ok...ignoring all the arguments going on in this thread, here is what you should do:

 

Are you planning on gaming at 4k, or upgrading to 4k in the future? Do you have a multimonitor surround setup? Then buy a 290x, or if you are patient, wait for the new 300 series coming in a few months.

 

Are you gaming at 1440p or below? Single or dual monitors? Then get a 970, it will perform better than any 290x, while being quieter, cooler, and using less power.

 

Do you record and edit videos? Get the 970. Shadowplay is definitely worth it if you record.

 

Do you live in a really cold place like the interior of canada? Buy a 290x, it will give you good performance while also warming up your entire house.

[Prastupok]

Ok...ignoring all the arguments going on in this thread, here is what you should do:

 

Are you planning on gaming at 4k, or upgrading to 4k in the future? Do you have a multimonitor surround setup? Then buy a 290x, or if you are patient, wait for the new 300 series coming in a few months.

 

Are you gaming at 1440p or below? Single or dual monitors? Then get a 970, it will perform better than any 290x, while being quieter, cooler, and using less power.

 

Do you record and edit videos? Get the 970. Shadowplay is definitely worth it if you record.

Amd has a built in recording solution I believe too.

If you're gaming at 4k on any game with decent graphics you're going to need 2 gpus... Theres

no way around it for now.

[Enderman]

Amd has a built in recording solution I believe too.

If you're gaming at 4k on any game with decent graphics you're going to need 2 gpus... Theres

no way around it for now.

1) yes, but shadowplay is more refined and actually works better, with less fps drops, and great for streaming too

you can eaven leave it running in the background 24/7 and not notice any performance loss

 

2) yes but some people buy a 970 to add a second or third in the future for 4k, which is not really a good idea with the vram bandwidth issue.

[Tim Drake]

GTX 970. Hands down.

 

SNIP

Dual 970s works fine on 4K.

 

If you need proof talk to @othertomperson

[Enderman]

GTX 970. Hands down.

 

Dual 970s works fine on 4K.

Not when you crank details to high/ultra with HD textures, because then you exceed 3.5GB of vram usage.

I have seen some people say they dont notice any fps drops/stuttering when using over 3.5GB, but there are also a ton of reports that do show a big drop in framerate.

 

So for someone looking to go 4k, they should invest in a 290x or 980

[Sauron]

Not when you crank details to high/ultra with HD textures, because then you exceed 3.5GB of vram usage.

I have seen some people say they dont notice any fps drops/stuttering when using over 3.5GB, but there are also a ton of reports that do show a big drop in framerate.

 

So for someone looking to go 4k, they should invest in a 290x or 980

 

bare in mind a 4k gamer won't turn on AA unless he feels it won't significantly affect performance. It's just not necessary. And from first hand experience, i can tell you there are very few games that actually exceed 3.5gb even at 4k without AA enabled. There are a few notable exceptions like wolfenstein TNO, but most games work differently.