gtx 970 or r9 390?

[don_svetlio]

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

A-sync shaders or A-sync compute is a feature built into DX12 that allows the GPUs to be better utilized. Essentially - think of it as a highway. Nvidia, they can either have 31 lanes of trucks (compute) or 1 lane of cars (graphics). AMD's GCN 1,1 and 1,2 allow for 64 lanes of trucks and 1 lane of cards to run at the same time - effectively giving a large increase in rendered frames.

[Vellinious]

I haven't seen a pair of 390s that could match up to my 970s yet.....  Start overclocking these cards, and the 970 wins...at 1080.  Even at 1440 it'd be close.  Higher than that, or 3 panel setups, the 390 is the better option.

There it is.

[iludez]

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

Its not a hardware defect lol,dx12 isnt even out yet properly wev had what two benchmarks?Give it time nvidia will catch up no doubt

 

 

I have no idea what im talking about?

yeah i dont own two 970s and 1 390 or anything http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/472021-r9-390-custom-backplate/#entry6328764

[don_svetlio]

Its not a hardware defect lol,dx12 isnt even out yet properly wev had what two benchmarks?Give it time nvidia will catch up no doubt

 

 

I have no idea what im talking about?

yeah i dont own two 970s and 1 390 or anything http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/472021-r9-390-custom-backplate/#entry6328764

Nvidia has had over 2 months now - several drivers that did next to nothing for GM204 and GM206 - only GM200 got fixed. Why? Cause it's a different, superior chip that costs a lot more.

@Pohernori can back me up - most 390s easily hit 1100.

[iludez]

Congrats on backtracking on what you just said.Most 390s hit 1100 and half hit 1200?

Woah big deal my 390 hits 1112 max and my 970s do 1500/1600 respectively 

[Sir_Chicken]

Congrats on backtracking on what you just said.Most 390s hit 1100 and half hit 1200?

Woah big deal my 390 hits 1112 max and my 970s do 1500/1600 respectively 

I asked earlier in this thread if it's better have 1500 mhz and 1600 cuda cores or 1 ghz and 2500 stream proccesors, and if they are essentialy the same thing. Nice backplate btw.

[don_svetlio]

Congrats on backtracking on what you just said.Most 390s hit 1100 and half hit 1200?

Woah big deal my 390 hits 1112 max and my 970s do 1500/1600 respectively 

Yet not every 970 can hit those clocks. Like you said, there's always the chance your card won't even push 10MHz. EVEN ON MAXWELL.

[don_svetlio]

I asked earlier in this thread if it's better have 1500 mhz and 1600 cuda cores or 1 ghz and 2500 stream proccesors, and if they are essentialy the same thing. Nice backplate btw.

You are not guaranteed an OC - it's silicon lottery, your card may end up with 1000Mhz and 1600CUDA cores.

[iludez]

every card ive seen on a 970 has got atleast 150 mhz

[iludez]

I asked earlier in this thread if it's better have 1500 mhz and 1600 cuda cores or 1 ghz and 2500 stream proccesors, and if they are essentialy the same thing. Nice backplate btw.

If you are at 1080p grab a 970 honestly. at 1080p a 970 is simply better 

i own both and have no bias as why would i own amd if i did?

[don_svetlio]

every card ive seen on a 970 has got atleast 150 mhz

150Mhz is quite low for a 970. @Godlygamer23 had a card that couldn't even hit the advertised boost clock.

[don_svetlio]

If you are at 1080p grab a 970 honestly. at 1080p a 970 is simply better 

i own both and have no bias as why would i own amd if i did?

what about Battlefront 1080p? 390 was a whole 10-15 fps ahead?

[iludez]

Its a dice game..............................amd has always been favoured by dice

[don_svetlio]

Its a dice game..............................amd has always been favoured by dice

It's not using mantle and still - 15 fps is a huge number.

[Sir_Chicken]

Its a dice game..............................amd has always been favoured by dice

+1 lol, I will probably never play battlefront anyway. Just battlefield 4

[iludez]

It's not using mantle and still - 15 fps is a huge number.

haha alright mate i guess you are pretty set on defending amd to the death so i shall leave my original opinions as they stand.I mena surely they count for something you know since I actually own both

[Vellinious]

I haven't come across a 970 yet, that couldn't hit 1500....that's a pretty average clock.  The only ones that are having trouble reaching those speeds are the cheap cards with the 1.212v restriction at the VRM.  The rest of them reach 1500 pretty easy.  Mod the bios, and they push 1600 pretty easy.

[don_svetlio]

I haven't come across a 970 yet, that couldn't hit 1500....that's a pretty average clock.  The only ones that are having trouble reaching those speeds are the cheap cards with the 1.212v restriction at the VRM.  The rest of them reach 1500 pretty easy.  Mod the bios, and they push 1600 pretty easy.

Because everyone can mod bioses...

No OC is guaranteed - on any card. I've seen a 650 Ti that crashed as soon as you increased the speed by 20MHz - it wanted +50mV to stay at +50Mhz core. Silicon lottery.

[i_build_nanosuits]

This is what you loose if you go with the R9 390:

 

This is what you gain in exchange, up to you to make the right choice for yourself

 

proven fact though the GTX 970 overclock a hell of a lot better and within 2 minutes of tweaking in afterburner will shrink this 4% advantage.

[don_svetlio]

haha alright mate i guess you are pretty set on defending amd to the death so i shall leave my original opinions as they stand.I mena surely they count for something you know since I actually own both

So your single sample applies to the millions of cards in usage? I'd no.

[Vellinious]

Because everyone can mod bioses...

No OC is guaranteed - on any card. I've seen a 650 Ti that crashed as soon as you increased the speed by 20MHz - it wanted +50mV to stay at +50Mhz core. Silicon lottery.

Getting ahold of a modded bios for just about every model of 970 out there is as easy as a google search.  THEN, it takes a visit to the device manager to disable the card, about a minute to run NVFlash to flash it.  It's so stupid easy to do, a monkey could do it.

No..no card is guaranteed to get an overclock.  But, you'd have to be the unluckiest person in the world, to get a 970 that wouldn't at least push 1450...I've seen some pretty WEAK overclockers out there, most of them the STRIX and Galax models, but....never seen one that couldn't at least 1500, even on the stock bios.  Power throttling through 1480, but...running 1500.  Which, coincidentally, is where the modded bios comes in.  lol

I'm done here....ya'll have a good day.  = D

[Sir_Chicken]

This is what you loose if you go with the R9 390:

 

This is what you gain in exchange, up to you to make the right choice for yourself

 

proven fact though the GTX 970 overclock a hell of a lot better and within 2 minutes of tweaking in afterburner will shrink this 4% advantage.

Pretty sure Crossfire is better than sli, these 2 guys where just kinda fighting each other and not really helping me out, I think I'm gonna go with the Evga gtx 970 ftw+ acx 2.0 because it has a free backplate, rainbow 6 siege which I would buy anyway.

[Vellinious]

Pretty sure Crossfire is better than sli, these 2 guys where just kinda fighting each other and not really helping me out, I think I'm gonna go with the Evga gtx 970 ftw+ acx 2.0 because it has a free backplate, rainbow 6 siege which I would buy anyway.

The FTW+ is a great card.  They have the better power phase for overclocking, a high factory overclock, higher stock power limits, and stay nice and cool with the ACX cooler.

[Sir_Chicken]

The FTW+ is a great card.  They have the better power phase for overclocking, a high factory overclock, higher stock power limits, and stay nice and cool with the ACX cooler.

if we're talking about this, what does the sc/ssc version do? In specifications lists it just seems to have lower Boost mhz.

[FatalityDiablo]

I haven't come across a 970 yet, that couldn't hit 1500....that's a pretty average clock.  The only ones that are having trouble reaching those speeds are the cheap cards with the 1.212v restriction at the VRM.  The rest of them reach 1500 pretty easy.  Mod the bios, and they push 1600 pretty easy.

actually my evga gtx 970 i had was better off at right under 1500mhz, then again it had an asic of 60something. my friends evga 1.0 sc version also was better of under 1500mhz, so yeah.. nevertheless an oc'd 390 is still faster than oc'd 970, aint it?

 

edit: mine was the ftw+ 2.0 with the bigger cooler.