Part suggestions V2

[Guest]

Actually the price gap is even wider.

 

R9 295X2 £518 - http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/part/xfx-video-card-r9295x8qfa

Titan Z - £1270 - http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/part/asus-video-card-gtxtitanz12gd5

 

So R9 295X2 x 2 for less than the Titan Z lol

[plowmannn]

This is a friendly post guys ;D I like the debate, it means i can weigh up which I should get but don't forget we are all on this forum for the same reason. Thanks too you both for the help.

[Guest]

This is a friendly post guys ;D I like the debate, it means i can weigh up which I should get but don't forget we are all on this forum for the same reason. Thanks too you both for the help.

Oh I agree entirely. I am not trying to turn this into a flame war. I just have a different opinion thats all 

 

I think you would be wise to wait on the upcoming 300 series from AMD. They look very promising.

[Atmos]

The Titan Z isn't a single card though is it ? In the same way a R9 295X2 isn't a single card. They are both dual gpu cards.

 

Secondly that review I linked clearly shows that the R9 295X2 beats the Titan Z in virtually every situation. Did you even read the conclusion ?

 

And guess what ? It does it for half the price.

 

... Both are SINGLE CARD solutions. They are Dual core, single cards... It's two architecture cores slapped on a SINGLE pcb. 

 

And in the benchmarks on pcper you can't really use. Almost all the games they used in their comparisons were AMD optimized (im looking at you Battlefield, bioshock, and Grid)  . The few games that weren't AMD branded games the Titan Z won in, alongside the 780ti SLI. Another one of the huge factors that ever graph had on their review was the massive stuttering and frame variance on the 295. Clearly highlighted on every, single, "frame Variance" graph, as well as the frame times which are all over the place on that card, as opposed to the relatively smooth frame times on the nvidia solutions.

 

Using the those benchmarks to examine across brands would be akin to me showing you the charts that a 660ti in AC blackflag beating a 280X with a difference of almost 20fps. Now, I'm no Nvidia fanboy, I even said in my OP that the 295 was what I would go with. But the Titan Z just has more Raw horse power, and when games, especially at 4k start using more than 4gb of vram, it will pose issues that only higher vram cards can accommodate.

[Guest]

... Both are SINGLE CARD solutions. They are Dual core, single cards... It's two architecture cores slapped on a SINGLE pcb. 

 

And in the benchmarks on pcper you can't really use. Almost all the games they used in their comparisons were AMD optimized (im looking at you Battlefield, bioshock, and Grid)  . The few games that weren't AMD branded games the Titan Z won in, alongside the 780ti SLI. Another one of the huge factors that ever graph had on their review was the massive stuttering and frame variance on the 295. Clearly highlighted on every, single, "frame Variance" graph, as well as the frame times which are all over the place on that card, as opposed to the relatively smooth frame times on the nvidia solutions.

 

Using the those benchmarks to examine across brands would be akin to me showing you the charts that a 660ti in AC blackflag beating a 280X with a difference of almost 20fps. Now, I'm no Nvidia fanboy, I even said in my OP that the 295 was what I would go with. But the Titan Z just has more Raw horse power, and when games, especially at 4k start using more than 4gb of vram, it will pose issues that only higher vram cards can accommodate.

Well I class them as dual cards as you can only have 2 of them in SLI.

 

Why are those benchmarks not valid ? I guess you didn't notice that the 780ti SLI actually beats the Titan Z in most of those games ?

 

The simple fact is that the Titan Z is £1200 and the R9 295X2 is £518. You would have to be insane to go with the Titan Z. Heck even GTX 980 SLI would beat down the Titan Z for less.

[Atmos]

Well I class them as dual cards as you can only have 2 of them in SLI.

 

Why are those benchmarks not valid ? I guess you didn't notice that the 780ti SLI actually beats the Titan Z in most of those games ?

 

The simple fact is that the Titan Z is £1200 and the R9 295X2 is £518. You would have to be insane to go with the Titan Z. Heck even GTX 980 SLI would beat down the Titan Z for less.

 

I'm guessing you didn't read my post past the first sentence. The majority of the games that they are using are AMD branded and optimized games. And you also are ducking the other point I made in "Vram for 4k is only going to go up, and since 4gb is already pushing it, then 6gb is ideal." 

 

But neither of us are going to agree on this, so let's agree to disagree on this point.

[Guest]

I'm guessing you didn't read my post past the first sentence. The majority of the games that they are using are AMD branded and optimized games. And you also are ducking the other point I made in "Vram for 4k is only going to go up, and since 4gb is already pushing it, then 6gb is ideal." 

 

But neither of us are going to agree on this, so let's agree to disagree on this point.

That link shows the 780ti SLI beating the Titan Z so what has that got to do with AMD optimized games ?

 

Also you don't need massive amounts of Vram at 4K.  

 

http://www.tweaktown.com/tweakipedia/68/amd-radeon-r9-290x-4gb-vs-8gb-4k-maxed-settings/index.html