AMD R9 390X or Nvidia GTX 980 for gaming?

[Ford_Enthusiast]

I don't know which one to pick, what's your guys' take on this?

[kingatlas]

980

[don_svetlio]

980 is 5% faster at 1080p but 100$ more expensive. Personally, i'd pick the 390X and spend the 100$ I saved on a good SSD or more RAM or 2-4 games

[DarkBlade2117]

390x is quite a bit cheaper than the 980, the R9 Nano or R9 Fury has much more comparable price points. I'd for a Fury or Nano.

[don_svetlio]

1 minute ago, DarkBlade2117 said:

390x is quite a bit cheaper than the 980, the R9 Nano or R9 Fury has much more comparable price points. I'd for a Fury or Nano.

True - both Nano and Fury outperform the 980 for around 20-30$ more

[Aytex]

390x beats it in dx12 but not many games are utilizing it atm

[ybriK]

390X, generally much cheaper than a 980 but 980 is a bit faster. Don't know where you live but from where I'm from an extra $75-100 doesn't justify getting a 980 over a 390X just for the small performance gain.

 

If you go 390X get either SAPPHIRE, MSI or XFX

If you go 980 get either EVGA, MSI or GIGABYTE

[Ford_Enthusiast]

12 minutes ago, ybriK said:

390X, generally much cheaper than a 980 but 980 is a bit faster. Don't know where you live but from where I'm from an extra $75-100 doesn't justify getting a 980 over a 390X just for the small performance gain.

 

If you go 390X get either SAPPHIRE, MSI or XFX

If you go 980 get either EVGA, MSI or GIGABYTE

Electricity where I live is expensive, do you think getting the 980 over 390X will be worth it? I looked online and the GTX was more efficient than the 390X

[don_svetlio]

1 minute ago, Ford_Enthusiast said:

Electricity where I live is expensive, do you think getting the 980 over 390X will be worth it? I looked online and the GTX was more efficient than the 390X

Nope. 980 uses 220W 390X uses 300W - that will be 5-10$ yearly at worst.

[Ford_Enthusiast]

1 minute ago, don_svetlio said:

Nope. 980 uses 220W 390X uses 300W - that will be 5-10$ yearly at worst.

Thanks for the reply! ~280$ a month for electricity bill, it's crazy expensive here in Nome, Alaska.

[don_svetlio]

16 minutes ago, Ford_Enthusiast said:

Thanks for the reply! ~280$ a month for electricity bill, it's crazy expensive here in Nome, Alaska.

You won't really notice it - a regular light bulb uses 75W - the difference between the 980 OCed and 390X (980 NEEDS an OC in order to be relevant to the discussion)

[Ford_Enthusiast]

8 minutes ago, don_svetlio said:

You won't really notice it - a regular light bulb uses 75W - the difference between the 980 OCed and 390X (980 NEEDS an OC in order to be relevant to the discussion)

Alright, thanks! I will be going with the 390X.

[Tech Deals]

56 minutes ago, don_svetlio said:

Nope. 980 uses 220W 390X uses 300W - that will be 5-10$ yearly at worst.

Just to toss some numbers at it...

 

If he is paying 20 cents per KWh and he actually uses the card 5 hours a day on average, his 3 year cost for power will be $87.60 more on the R9 390x over the GTX 980.

 

Now that difference might be trivial, that is up to each person, but it is more than $5-10 a year.

 

If you were in Hawaii paying 37 cents per KWH, the 3 year cost difference becomes $162.06.

 

Ouch!

[don_svetlio]

3 minutes ago, Tech Deals said:

Just to toss some numbers at it...

 

If he is paying 20 cents per KWh and he actually uses the card 5 hours a day on average, his 3 year cost for power will be $87.60 more on the R9 390x over the GTX 980.

 

Now that difference might be trivial, that is up to each person, but it is more than $5-10 a year.

 

If you were in Hawaii paying 37 cents per KWH, the 3 year cost difference becomes $162.06.

 

Ouch!

20 cents? Where the F do you live? That's 10 times what it costs in 99% of the world

 

Your math is wrong - total is 8.7$ yearly

[Tech Deals]

39 minutes ago, don_svetlio said:

You won't really notice it - a regular light bulb uses 75W - the difference between the 980 OCed and 390X (980 NEEDS an OC in order to be relevant to the discussion)

Side note: I switched all my light bulbs to LEDs last year...  Cost me about $400 to replace every bulb in my house, but it cut almost $300 a year from my total power bill (I have kids who are forever leaving the lights on!).

 

The payback is less than 2 years, frankly a no-brainer and the LED bulbs are far better than the old CFLs which I always disliked.

[Tech Deals]

36 minutes ago, don_svetlio said:

20 cents? Where the F do you live? That's 10 times what it costs in 99% of the world

 

Your math is wrong - total is 8.7$ yearly

At 80 watts difference, it takes 12.5 hours to consume a KWh.

 

So every 12.5 hours you're using the card, you're spending 20 cents to drive the R9 390x vs the GTX 980, assuming of course you're paying 20 cents per KWH (which is high for the US in general, but perhaps not for Nome, Alaska.)

 

5 hours a day times 365 days a year is 1,825 hours.  Times 3 years is 5,475 hours.

Divide that by 12.5 hours and you get 438 KWh.

 

So in 3 years, at that usage, the R9 390x will use 438 KWh more than the GTX 980

 

At the US average of 12 cents per KWh, that works out to $52.56

At the Hawaii average of 37 cents per KWh, that works out to $162.06

If you're in Australia paying 26 cents per KWh, that works out to $113.88

 

If you think my math is wrong, please show your work, but I'm 99% sure that I did that correctly.

[don_svetlio]

9 minutes ago, Tech Deals said:

At 80 watts difference, it takes 12.5 hours to consume a KWh.

 

So every 12.5 hours you're using the card, you're spending 20 cents to drive the R9 390x vs the GTX 980, assuming of course you're paying 20 cents per KWH (which is high for the US in general, but perhaps not for Nome, Alaska.)

 

5 hours a day times 365 days a year is 1,825 hours.  Times 3 years is 5,475 hours.

Divide that by 12.5 hours and you get 438 KWh.

 

So in 3 years, at that usage, the R9 390x will use 438 KWh more than the GTX 980

 

At the US average of 12 cents per KWh, that works out to $52.56

At the Hawaii average of 37 cents per KWh, that works out to $162.06

If you're in Australia paying 26 cents per KWh, that works out to $113.88

 

If you think my math is wrong, please show your work, but I'm 99% sure that I did that correctly.

Yearly differnece for a 100W lightbulb in the UK is 20 quid - that's 15$. 75W difference is 10% or 15 quid (give or take)

[Tech Deals]

1 minute ago, don_svetlio said:

Yearly differnece for a 100W lightbulb in the UK is 20 quid - that's 15$. 75W difference is 10% or 15 quid (give or take)

Maybe, depending on how often it is left on...  but you have to show the math, because a bulb used 1 hour a day uses a whole lot less power than one that is never turned off...

 

How much extra power AMD's card will use of course depends on how often it is used and how often it is used for gaming (since it really only pulls the extra power when gaming).

 

---

 

A 100 watt light bulb, left on 10 hours a day, will consume 1 KWH per day.  At the 20 cents per KWh in the UK, that means it will cost 20 cents per day, or $73 per year to leave on 10 hours a day.

 

Replace that bulb with a 15 watt LED (similar light output) and you'll drop from $73 a year to $10.95 a year.

 

Considering such a bulb is less than $10, that is actually a no-brainer.  But most people don't leave such lights on 10 hours a day and in the US, power is 12 cents per KWh average.

 

---

 

Most of the bulbs in my house were 60 watts, they are replaced with 9 watt bulbs.  Take a standard ceiling fan that has 4 bulbs and is on for 4 hours a day.

 

4 hours x 4 bulbs x 365 days = 5,840 hours @ 60 watts, or 350.4 KWH per year.  At 12 cents per KWh that works out to $42.05 per year to operate that ceiling fan.

 

Replace those 4 bulbs with 9 watt LEDs and the same usage and the annual price drops to $6.31, saving $35.74 which is just about what those 4 bulbs cost.

 

They are even cheaper today.

 

http://www.amazon.com/TCP-LA1027KND6-LED-A19-Equivalent/dp/B00KDZGBM8

 

$20 buys you 6 of them, or $3.40 a bulb.  If you don't replace most of your bulbs with these, you're just throwing money away.  They have no flicker or hum like CFLs did and they produce a nice steady light.

[don_svetlio]

1 minute ago, Tech Deals said:

Maybe, depending on how often it is left on...  but you have to show the math, because a bulb used 1 hour a day uses a whole lot less power than one that is never turned off...

 

How much extra power AMD's card will use of course depends on how often it is used and how often it is used for gaming (since it really only pulls the extra power when gaming).

 

---

 

A 100 watt light bulb, left on 10 hours a day, will consume 1 KWH per day.  At the 20 cents per KWh in the UK, that means it will cost 20 cents per day, or $73 per year to leave on 10 hours a day.

 

Replace that bulb with a 15 watt LED (similar light output) and you'll drop from $73 a year to $10.95 a year.

 

Considering such a bulb is less than $10, that is actually a no-brainer.  But most people don't leave such lights on 10 hours a day and in the US, power is 12 cents per KWh average.

 

---

 

Most of the bulbs in my house were 60 watts, they are replaced with 9 watt bulbs.  Take a standard ceiling fan that has 4 bulbs and is on for 4 hours a day.

 

4 hours x 4 bulbs x 365 days = 5,840 hours @ 60 watts, or 350.4 KWH per year.  At 12 cents per KWh that works out to $42.05 per year to operate that ceiling fan.

 

Replace those 4 bulbs with 9 watt LEDs and the same usage and the annual price drops to $6.31, saving $35.74 which is just about what those 4 bulbs cost.

 

They are even cheaper today.

 

http://www.amazon.com/TCP-LA1027KND6-LED-A19-Equivalent/dp/B00KDZGBM8

 

$20 buys you 6 of them, or $3.40 a bulb.  If you don't replace most of your bulbs with these, you're just throwing money away.  They have no flicker or hum like CFLs did and they produce a nice steady light.

We've done this math a million times on this forum - you still have to factor in a LOT of variables - at idle AMD cards use 0W due to ZeroCore tech whereas NVidia cards pull 25W or so. You also have to take into account that not all games will use the GPU at 100%. The average is 10$ more yearly, we've established this here dozens of times already.

[Tech Deals]

1 minute ago, don_svetlio said:

We've done this math a million times on this forum - you still have to factor in a LOT of variables - at idle AMD cards use 0W due to ZeroCore tech whereas NVidia cards pull 25W or so. You also have to take into account that not all games will use the GPU at 100%. The average is 10$ more yearly, we've established this here dozens of times already.

If you wish to claim $10 average yearly, you have to show some math, otherwise you're just making up numbers.

 

The above math I posted is accurate and shows far higher numbers than "$10 more yearly", if you wish to dispute this, do it with numbers and math, not "because I said so".

[don_svetlio]

3 minutes ago, Tech Deals said:

If you wish to claim $10 average yearly, you have to show some math, otherwise you're just making up numbers.

 

The above math I posted is accurate and shows far higher numbers than "$10 more yearly", if you wish to dispute this, do it with numbers and math, not "because I said so".

It's the middle of the night - just use the site search function to find the previous discussions on the topic

[Ford_Enthusiast]

Lmao you both crack me up, thanks for your guys' input  I'm a newbie to the whole PC gaming business. Hope you guys have a wonderful day!

[don_svetlio]

6 minutes ago, Ford_Enthusiast said:

Lmao you both crack me up, thanks for your guys' input  I'm a newbie to the whole PC gaming business. Hope you guys have a wonderful day!

Don't mind him - he's the reason people believe AMD cards increase your power bill by "insert 4-digit number here" - there have been numerous threads where this has been proven to be a myth and not true. His math is wonkey as well.

[SteveGrabowski0]

Buying either is retarded this close to Pascal. I'd wait for the GTX 1070 or GTX 1080.

[Phoenix721]

I'd get an r9 fury or an r9 390, but just between those two, a 390x.