Amd ot nvidia

[DanielK033730112]

I have a fx 8350 4.0ghz

I need a new video card 

Its between a R9 290x 4gb R9 380x or Gtx 960 4gb witch one balance up my cpu plz

 

[Centurius]

What are the prices for each? If they are close together even though it'll be bottlenecked it's still better to go 290X as even bottlenecked it will perform better than the others.

[I am an SSD]

Just now, DanielK033730112 said:

I have a fx 8350 4.0ghz

I need a new video card 

Its between a R9 290x 4gb R9 380x or Gtx 960 4gb witch one balance up my cpu plz

 

R9 290x? Will help if you ever upgrade the CPU...

[Ryoutarou97]

Are you trying to start a flame war? If you can I would say maybe wait for next gen or get a low end used card and wait for next gen.

[don_svetlio]

290X is definitely the one to go for

[Windows7ge]

I had to overclock my old FX-8150 to at least 4.2GHz to alleviate the bottleneck when running two Radeon HD 7970's in CFX. A single r9 290X would have more streaming processing cores than the 380 albeit at a lower clock speed which could be adjusted manually. So I'd say for best performance your fight is between a 290X and a 960. A few benchmark sites say the r9 290X comes out ahead but that's under the assumption that their isn't any other bottleneck, which generally even on a high end AMD platform I always found GPU performance was bottlenecked. So I'd say go with the cheaper of the two. That'd be the best price/performance ratio. Then in the future if you upgrade your platform (motherboard, CPU, maybe RAM) you might see a performance bump in games due to an alleviated bottleneck between the GPU and the CPU.

[DanielK033730112]

10 minutes ago, Centurius said:

What are the prices for each? If they are close together even though it'll be bottlenecked it's still better to go 290X as even bottlenecked it will perform better than the others.

In sweden the 290x costs about 350$ gtx 960 is between 260-273$

And the 380x is about 290$

[Sakkura]

1 minute ago, Windows7ge said:

I had to overclock my old FX-8150 to at least 4.2GHz to alleviate the bottleneck when running two Radeon HD 7970's in CFX. A single r9 290X would have more streaming processing cores than the 380 albeit at a lower clock speed which could be adjusted manually. So I'd say for best performance your fight is between a 290X and a 960. A few benchmark sites say the r9 290X comes out ahead but that's under the assumption that their isn't any other bottleneck, which generally even on a high end AMD platform I always found GPU performance was bottlenecked. So I'd say go with the cheaper of the two. That'd be the best price/performance ratio. Then in the future if you upgrade your platform (motherboard, CPU, maybe RAM) you might see a performance bump in games due to an alleviated bottleneck between the GPU and the CPU.

What are you talking about. The 290X crushes the 960, it's in an entirely different segment of the market (up with the GTX 970 and 980).

[don_svetlio]

1 minute ago, DanielK033730112 said:

In sweden the 290x costs about 350$ gtx 960 is between 260-273$

And the 380x is about 290$

290X no question

[Coaxialgamer]

2 minutes ago, Windows7ge said:

I had to overclock my old FX-8150 to at least 4.2GHz to alleviate the bottleneck when running two Radeon HD 7970's in CFX. A single r9 290X would have more streaming processing cores than the 380 albeit at a lower clock speed which could be adjusted manually. So I'd say for best performance your fight is between a 290X and a 960. A few benchmark sites say the r9 290X comes out ahead but that's under the assumption that their isn't any other bottleneck, which generally even on a high end AMD platform I always found GPU performance was bottlenecked. So I'd say go with the cheaper of the two. That'd be the best price/performance ratio. Then in the future if you upgrade your platform (motherboard, CPU, maybe RAM) you might see a performance bump in games due to an alleviated bottleneck between the GPU and the CPU.

No . Just no. 960 and 290x are for completely different markets and perform very differently . my 290x scores twice what my friend's 960 scores in heaven . 

[PlayStation 2]

5 minutes ago, DanielK033730112 said:

In sweden the 290x costs about 350$ gtx 960 is between 260-273$

And the 380x is about 290$

Scaling the prices, that's cheap as fuck for a 290X.

[Windows7ge]

2 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

What are you talking about. The 290X crushes the 960, it's in an entirely different segment of the market (up with the GTX 970 and 980).

You seem to have misinterpreted what I wrote. I'm agreeing with you, yes it's more powerful. However what good does it do if the CPU bottlenecks it? (He should be fine with a 8350@4.0GHz though) That's the point I'm making. Also in a price to performance ratio. Think of it this way.

(hypothetical situation)

If a 960 costs $200 and you get 40fps in a game

but a R9 290X is $400 and you get 50fps, it's not worth it (unless you're rich).

[Centurius]

9 minutes ago, DanielK033730112 said:

In sweden the 290x costs about 350$ gtx 960 is between 260-273$

And the 380x is about 290$

290x, definitely

[don_svetlio]

1 minute ago, Windows7ge said:

You seem to have misinterpreted what I wrote. I'm agreeing with you, yes it's more powerful. However what good does it do if the CPU bottlenecks it? (He should be fine with a 8350@4.0GHz though) That's the point I'm making. Also in a price to performance ratio. Think of it this way.

(hypothetical situation)

If a 960 costs $200 and you get 40fps in a game

but a R9 290X is $400 and you get 50fps, it's not worth it (unless you're rich).

But a 960 costs 290$ and a 290X costs 350$ and a 290X will increase its performance by 50% when he changes the CPU whereas a 960 would still be a potato

[Windows7ge]

5 minutes ago, Coaxialgamer said:

No . Just no. 960 and 290x are for completely different markets and perform very differently . my 290x scores twice what my friend's 960 scores in heaven . 

Let's say you're running a core i3 processor with no plans of upgrading it and you buy a 290X...that was a large waste of money because the bottleneck would be immense. I'm looking at the system as a whole not the GPU alone. If you read my message correctly I said "The 290X comes out ahead" I"M AGREEING WITH YOU, what part of my message has you thinking I'm against you?

[don_svetlio]

1 minute ago, Windows7ge said:

Let's say you're running a core i3 processor with no plans of upgrading it and you buy a 290X...that was a large waste of money because the bottleneck would be immense. I'm looking at the system as a whole not the GPU alone. If you read my message correctly I said "The 290X comes out ahead" I"M AGREEING WITH YOU, what part of my message has you thinking I'm against you?

But then you buy an i5 in 6 months and suddenly your GPU performs 100% better. If you have a 960 you are stuck with a potato

[Windows7ge]

4 minutes ago, don_svetlio said:

But a 960 costs 290$ and a 290X costs 350$ and a 290X will increase its performance by 50% when he changes the CPU whereas a 960 would still be a potato

Hmm, I said go with the cheaper of the two. Alright you got me there, I was wrong. If the performance outweighs the cost then most definitely go with the 290X. 

[DanielK033730112]

36 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

What are you talking about. The 290X crushes the 960, it's in an entirely different segment of the market (up with the GTX 970 and 980).

A 290x is a bit over my budget will a 290x second hand make it preform less better or does it even matter

 

[Sakkura]

2 minutes ago, DanielK033730112 said:

A 290x is a bit over my budget will a 290x second hand make it preform less better or does it even matter

 

Doesn't affect the performance. You could also go for a 290, it's only a little bit slower than the 290X.

 

Either way, just avoid cards with the reference cooler.

[afyeung]

8 minutes ago, DanielK033730112 said:

A 290x is a bit over my budget will a 290x second hand make it preform less better or does it even matter

 

A second hand part will never perform "less better" unless it's been tampered with or near the end of its life cycle. 290x is only 3 years old so it's nowhere near that

[DanielK033730112]

9 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

Doesn't affect the performance. You could also go for a 290, it's only a little bit slower than the 290X.

 

Either way, just avoid cards with the reference cooler.

Im not a "extreme gamer" i play dayz csgo and bf4. And im not the best at graphics card so could u recomend a graphic card ... Or mayne is the 290 ur recomendation

 

[Sakkura]

41 minutes ago, DanielK033730112 said:

Im not a "extreme gamer" i play dayz csgo and bf4. And im not the best at graphics card so could u recomend a graphic card ... Or mayne is the 290 ur recomendation

 

A 290 would be good.

[DanielK033730112]

no others like 270x or 380x?

 

[kronickiller]

290x is a cool toy

 

[max_headroom]

I don't know if you can even buy a 290X.  They're pretty much sold out.  Unless you go to the used market.

 

The 380X is a better card than the 960.  It's also about $75 more than the 960.

 

For R9 380X money, spend the extra $50 and get yourself a GTX 970 with a free copy of the Division.  A far better card than anything you listed.

 

If you go the 290X route, make sure your PSU can handle it.  It's a very hot and power hungry card.  You don't want to turn your room into a furnace.