gtx 970 or r9 390?

[Sir_Chicken]

For gaming, they are same price for me, and I don't know what aspect of these cards should I focus on for gaming.

evga gtx 970 ftw+ http://www.newegg.com/global/pl/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487090

msi r9 390 twin frozr 5 http://www.newegg.com/global/pl/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127874&cm_re=r9_390-_-14-127-874-_-Product

 

I watched a lot of benchmarks and the fps is basically same. Power consumption shouldn't limit me and 8gb of vram could be nice. I saw a lot of people saying that R9 390 is way better than it's rival, but what about all the technologies nVidia has?

 

(free rainbow 6 siege with gtx 970, wchich is a BIG +)

[PlayStation 2]

The GTX 970 doesn't have much going for it, unless you NEEEED Shadowplay.

[Opeth747]

This question gets asked practically everyday. You can use search and see the million of threads with the same title. 

To be short and sweet, 390.

To what technologies are you referring to?

[Sir_Chicken]

The GTX 970 doesn't have much going for it, unless you NEEEED Shadowplay.

Nah, screw shadowplay I don't even have Nvidia Experience installed with gtx 660ti

[Kobathor]

Nah, screw shadowplay I don't even have Nvidia Experience installed with gtx 660ti

If you're not using Shadowplay then get the 390. In newer games there really is a difference in FPS, games like Battlefront saw 10+FPS difference. Also, in most places, the 390 is cheaper.

[Opeth747]

(free rainbow 6 siege with gtx 970, wchich is a BIG +)

You would sacrifice performance and a longer life span for a free game? (Which wasn't even that great from the beta?)

[Sir_Chicken]

This question gets asked practically everyday. You can use search and see the million of threads with the same title. 

To be short and sweet, 390.

To what technologies are you referring to?

I know this question gets asked everyday, and after further investigation I don't know which am I reffering to...

[vpavlicevic]

390 if for nothing for 8GB VRAM and also comfirmed DX 12 support

[STRMfrmXMN]

R9 390 for sure.

[FatalityDiablo]

simply out of solidarity to an awesome and unfortunately struggling company such as amd you should go for the 390 + it is the better gpu anyways

[Sir_Chicken]

You would sacrifice performance and a longer life span for a free game? (Which wasn't even that great from the beta?)

No I'm just saying it's a plus, and I could sell the game anyway. 

[Vellinious]

I would say it depends on if you plan to overclock or not.  AND, if you plan on gaming in anything higher than 1080.

Higher than 1080 - easily the 390
Plan to overclock and probably mod the bios, put it under water and really overclock it - 970

Plug and play?  390

[Sir_Chicken]

390 if for nothing for 8GB VRAM and also comfirmed DX 12 support

Guess the 8gb will be kinda "future proofing" and DX 12 is a must.

[Sir_Chicken]

R9 390 for sure.

Not wanting to be a not nice guy, but I would also like to hear why. For example it has 0,5 more stream/cuda cores than the gtx 970.

[Sir_Chicken]

I would say it depends on if you plan to overclock or not.  AND, if you plan on gaming in anything higher than 1080.

Higher than 1080 - easily the 390

Plan to overclock and probably mod the bios, put it under water and really overclock it - 970

Plug and play?  390

Thanks for saying why this and this, not just saying 390 is better.

And also I won't be getting more than 1080p display in a long time.

[Sir_Chicken]

simply out of solidarity to an awesome and unfortunately struggling company such as amd you should go for the 390 + it is the better gpu anyways

Talking about companies, will I benefit in any way from have an AMD cpu and gpu? And also will lower tier amd cpu's bottleneck the 390?

[iludez]

Im an actual user who has and owns both cards

A g1 970,evga 970 ftw 

sapphire nitro r9 390

 

Lets start with performance.at 1080p the 970 was clearly winning,1440p they were very even,slight edge to 390

Overclocking 970 hit 1580mhz stable and gave a good 15% increase, 390 only overclocks to 1112 mhz 

3d mark both stock the 390 won only by a little

When both cards are overclocked the 970 wins,These were my tests and im a real end user 

 

at 1080p grab the 970 at 1440p they are close but get 390

[don_svetlio]

R9 390 supports DX12 properly, unlike the 970 which not only cannot do A-sync compute but it also only has 3.5GB of usable VRAM - multiple users have reported that to be an issue in several games EVEN at 1080p. R9 390 is more powerful across the board and recent Battlefront videos show it ahead by 10 fps or more.

[Vellinious]

lol, every time one of these posts show up, the async compute thing comes up and that stupid video.  We all know, that stock for stock, the 390 is the better card at higher resolutions....that's never been in dispute.  My goodness.  The AMD fan boys make these threads unbearable.

[don_svetlio]

lol, every time one of these posts show up, the async compute thing comes up and that stupid video.  We all know, that stock for stock, the 390 is the better card at higher resolutions....that's never been in dispute.  My goodness.  The AMD fan boys make these threads unbearable.

How exactly is someone a fanboy for pointing out facts? A-sync is a fact, it won't go way, Nvidia chips, with the exception of GM200, can't do it even if their life depended on it and thus they fall behind by 20-30% in DX12 benches shown thus far.

As for clocks - 1 MHz on AMD means more than 1 MHz on Nvidia - different architectures and different ways the instructions are handled - hence why a 1200MHz 390 beats a 1500Mhz 970. And why a 1GHz Fury matches a 1500Mhz 980

[FatalityDiablo]

Talking about companies, will I benefit in any way from have an AMD cpu and gpu? And also will lower tier amd cpu's bottleneck the 390?

no, not really. you could rock a fx6300 and be fine, but on the cpu I'd personally only go intel in this time period, since the amd cpu side of things is simply garbage ,imo.

[iludez]

How exactly is someone a fanboy for pointing out facts? A-sync is a fact, it won't go way, Nvidia chips, with the exception of GM200, can't do it even if their life depended on it and thus they fall behind by 20-30% in DX12 benches shown thus far.

As for clocks - 1 MHz on AMD means more than 1 MHz on Nvidia - different architectures and different ways the instructions are handled - hence why a 1200MHz 390 beats a 1500Mhz 970. And why a 1GHz Fury matches a 1500Mhz 980

A 970 has 4gbs of usable memory given the last 500mb is slower its still usable.

Most 390s are not going to get over 1100 mhz,

So far we dont know the exact details surrounding dx12 and nvidia they could release a driver and blow away amd who knows

[don_svetlio]

A 970 has 4gbs of usable memory given the last 500mb is slower its still usable.

Most 390s are not going to get over 1100 mhz,

So far we dont know the exact details surrounding dx12 and nvidia they could release a driver and blow away amd who knows

How exactly does a driver fix a hardware defect? The scheduler on GM204, GM206 won't allow for the compute lanes to run simultaneously with the graphics lane effectively rendering the whole idea useless as you still have a queue.

Almost every 390 goes to 1100 and half go to 1200 - you have no idea what you're talking about

[Sir_Chicken]

R9 390 supports DX12 properly, unlike the 970 which not only cannot do A-sync compute but it also only has 3.5GB of usable VRAM - multiple users have reported that to be an issue in several games EVEN at 1080p. R9 390 is more powerful across the board and recent Battlefront videos show it ahead by 10 fps or more.

 

I knew there were complains about 3.5 vram, but never knew it would be such an issue as you described it. I gess I will go with the r9 390. And also, what is A-sync? Didn't find anything about it, only know freesync and gsync

[Sir_Chicken]

no, not really. you could rock a fx6300 and be fine, but on the cpu I'd personally only go intel in this time period, since the amd cpu side of things is simply garbage ,imo.

I was planning to get an intel cpu anyway, just asking.