GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition vS AMD's R9 290

[Gregster]

GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition Video Card Review
The GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition video card has the fastest factory Boost Clock of all GTX 780 video cards on the market. It performs at 1072MHz out-of-box, and even faster frequencies in-game. We continue pushing its overclock, and compare it to an AMD Radeon R9 290. The GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition just might be the video card for you.

continued...
Overclocked R9 290 Apples to Apples Testing
In this section of our evaluation we will be comparing the overclocked GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition directly with the overclocked AMD Radeon R9 290 video card. Remember, our GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition has been overclocked to 1090MHz base clock, with the boost clock at 1142MHz. This results in a real-world frequency of 1267MHz. The memory was also overclocked to 1602MHz or 6.4GHz GDDR5.

Article Image Article Image
Overclocking the AMD Radeon R9 290 is a relatively simple, however still a somewhat new process. Instead of having direct control of the video cards operating frequency we now decide on a few factors. These are the Power Limit setting, the GPU clock setting, and the memory clock setting. These are all percentage based.

First we increased power limit to its highest value of 50%. We did not realize any negative effects to running this high of a power limit, as to running 30% for instance. This assured maximum power should the need for it arise. This allowed us to increase the GPU clock setting to 14%. This increased the Radeon R9 290's default clock from 947MHz to 1080MHz. We also found that an additional 10% on the memory brought the frequency up to 1375MHz or 5.5GHz GDDR5.

The purpose of this comparison is to directly compare the GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition with the overclocked R9 290 to determine if the R9 290's overclock makes it the better value as far as performance for price is concerned.

Keep in mind this is a reference AMD Radeon R9 290, we do not have any custom retail cards yet.

Battlefield 4
In this comparison in Battlefield 4 we are comparing at 2560x1600 with 2X MSAA and "Ultra" settings enabled.

Spoiler

Article Image
(Click Graph for Larger Image)
In our Battlefield 4 performance testing we discovered the stock Radeon R9 290 was only playable at 2560x1600 when using FXAA "Low" as our AA setting. Here, we see that the overclock brought its performance up to 58.5 FPS at these settings. This is more or less playable by our standards. It is just shy of 58.5, however the gameplay was not as jumpy as it was before. The overclocked GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition averaged 64.7 FPS at these settings. This is 10.6% faster than the overclocked Radeon R9 290.

Tomb Raider
In Tomb Raider we are comparing at 2560x1600 with FXAA and "Ultra" settings and "TressFX" enabled.

Article Image
(Click Graph for Larger Image)

Spoiler

The AMD Radeon R9 290 performed more admirably after receiving its overclock. It averaged 54 FPS at these settings. It does not receive as large of a performance charge for playing with TressFX hair as the GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition because it is an AMD based GPU. Still, the overclocked GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition was 3.7% faster and averaged 56 FPS. In terms of gameplay, the two were very similar. The slight performance advantage did not really change the scope of the two gameplay experiences.

Crysis 3
In this test we have Crysis 3 configured to operate at 2560x1600 with 2TX SMAA and "Very High" settings enabled.

Article Image
(Click Graph for Larger Image)

Spoiler

We found that the overclock did enough to allow our GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition to enable "Very High" settings in Crysis 3. It averaged 44.4 FPS with these settings. This is 7.2% faster than the overclocked AMD Radeon R9 290 which averaged 41.4 FPS. The overclock was not enough to provide playable gameplay at these settings, however it did provide a noticeable performance gain compared to its stock performance.

Far Cry 3
In our first test in Far Cry 3 we are comparing at 2560x1600 with 4X MSAA and "Ultra" settings enabled.

Article Image
(Click Graph for Larger Image)

Spoiler

Our overclocked GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition delivered the better performance of these two video cards at these settings. It averaged 43 FPS which we determined was playable. This performance is 13.2% faster than the AMD Radeon R9 290, which averaged 38 FPS. Unfortunately for the Radeon R9 290, the overclock was not enough for it to perform at our desirable rate of play.

Overclocked GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition vs. Overclocked Radeon R9 290
The first thing we are going to discuss about overclocking these two video cards was the relative ease of each. The GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition was the easier of the two. With OC GURU II we were quickly able to increase our power target and voltages, and begin increasing our clock speed. What makes the Radeon R9 290 more difficult to overclock, is that it uses a percentage based system. Instead of setting it to run at 1090MHz, you have to find the correct percentage that will provide that frequency.

Second, the biggest difference that we saw between these two video cards were the power, temperature, and fan noise. The overclocked GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition remained exclusively cool in temperature, only increasing to 67c under load. The AMD Radeon R9 290 ran at 95c under load. This makes a huge difference in terms of ambient heat in your case, plus we feel better knowing our hardware is constantly dissipating heat with the WINDFORCE 3X 450W cooling system supplied on the GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition. Power draw was considerably higher on the Radeon R9 290, when overclocked it drew 484W compared to 428W on the GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition.

Last is the performance increase experienced from overclocking the video cards, and how these compete against each other. We found that the GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition's overclock was more valuable. Throughout this evaluation we found instances where it allowed higher levels of AA, or higher quality graphics in game. The Radeon R9 290's overclock did a good job of narrowing the performance gap between the two video cards, however it still performed noticeably slower compared to the GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition.

The Bottom Line
During our evaluation of the GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition video card, we have come to enjoy and respect the performance level available in today's most demanding games. Architecturally the GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition is a solid video card. The metal back plate and metal fan housing provide the necessary security of our investment, without looking bulky or unattractive. The WINDFORCE 3X 450W cooling system provides guaranteed heat dissipation up to 450W of power, and we saw much lower power consumption than the competition while remaining at a higher level of play.

One of the finer selling points of the GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition is that it is the fastest clocked GeForce GTX 780 video card on the market, being sold via retail. It's base clock of 1020MHz and boost clock of 1072MHz generate enough performance for the GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition to outperform a closely priced Radeon R9 290. In fact, in none of our tests did the AMD Radeon R9 290 outperform the GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition.

The GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition is currently available at the price of $499.99 after $10 MIR. Purchasing this video card assures users the fastest out-of-box overclock on a GTX 780 GPU. While it already has this overclock, with OC GURU II you can push its limits even farther. You do pay a premium compared to other GeForce GTX 780 video cards, however it may be worth it for the guaranteed clock speeds and performance therein.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014..._ghz_edition_video_card_review/9#.Ut5e3hBFCUl

A good review and comparison for those considering a new top end GPU.

 

[Orangey]

[H] once again failing to OC the 290 properly.

1267 vs 1080

 

[LtMatt]

They should have tested an AIB 290 vs a AIB 780 ghz to be honest as the AIB 290's are only slightly cheaper than a 780 Ghz but the reference 290 is considerably cheaper than the 780 Ghz. (£70 difference at ocuk) I expect they wanted to make the card for review (the 780 ghz) stand out though so no sense pitting it against a AIB 290 which will be neck and neck.

 

[Gregster]

They should have tested an AIB 290 vs a AIB 780 ghz to be honest as the AIB 290's are only slightly cheaper than a 780 Ghz but the reference 290 is considerably cheaper than the 780 Ghz. (£70 difference at ocuk)

What are the proper AIB 290's? I know most of them still use the reference PCB and chucked on a cooler.

Ohhh and the Author has the coolest name ever - Brent Justice

 

[Orangey]

AFAIK DCu II, Gaming Edition and Windforce are custom PCB but not much different from reference. Gaming Ed uses Hynix modules.

 

[humbug]

[H] once again failing to OC the 290 properly.

1267 vs 1080

Its down to the skill of the reviewer.

With that someone needs to teach [H] how to overclock, 1080Mhz is not really an overclock at all.

This one is also a reference 290 vs an AIB 780, its not an Apples for Apples comparison, never the less [H] are hysterically bad at overclocking any AMD GPU.

 

[LtMatt]

What are the proper AIB 290's? I know most of them still use the reference PCB and chucked on a cooler.

Ohhh and the Author has the coolest name ever - Brent Justice

Yeah it is an awesome name!

Well Hawaii produces better fps at lower temps so any AIB card really. It just seems unfair to stick a overclocked 780 with a good cooler against a much cheaper 290 on a reference blower. Not that i blame them, probably wanted to ensure a good review for the card in question to make it stand out.

But to show what a AIB 290 can do

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7601/sapphire-radeon-r9-290-review-our-first-custom-cooled-290/3

That's only with a 50mhz core bump as well on a 290 Pro. That would probably be even with a 780 ghz i expect.

I don't mind H being used though, as ive used them myself previously. But its not really a fair comparison in my eyes.

 

[Silent_Scone]

Surely he's had that changed lol. Nobody has a name that cool.

Not sure what [H] are up to but they seem to be wacking up the volts 'because they can' and not really going for very efficient clocks on the 290 (at least at the Ti overclocking review). It's very easy to stay tame with voltage on the Ti because you don't really get any leeway anyway lol.

Making good use of GPU Tweaks '**** iiiiit' slider.

This is also interesting:

In Battlefield 4 the GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition was playable at 2560x1600 using "Ultra" settings with 2X MSAA enabled. The Radeon R9 290 required we play with "FXAA Low" selected, meaning slightly blurred textures, but smoother edges and objects. Overclocking the GIGABYTE GTX 780 GHz Edition improved performance by 7.5%, but was not enough to enable 4X MSAA.

would have thought the 290X would excel here at 1600P even with a milder OC.

 

[Marine-RX179]

What are the proper AIB 290's? I know most of them still use the reference PCB and chucked on a cooler.

Ohhh and the Author has the coolest name ever - Brent Justice

Nevertheless, the 1080MHz on the core is quite low. I managed to overclock my 290x to 1200MHz when it was still on stock cooler (shame I got duff Eplida memory that couldn't be clocked too high). It could even manage up to 1240Mhz without driver crash, but there was artifact (didn't get lucky on landing a good chip) so I settled on 1200MHz as max core clock.

 

[Gregster]

Nevertheless, the 1080MHz on the core is quite low. I managed to overclock my 290x to 1200MHz when it was still on stock cooler (shame I got duff Eplida memory that couldn't be clocked too high). It could even manage up to 1240Mhz without driver crash, but there was artifact (didn't get lucky on landing a good chip) so I settled on 1200MHz as max core clock.

1200Mhz is a good clock and I have seen some serious volts needed to reach that clock on some cards.

 

[Gregster]

But to show what a AIB 290 can do

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7601/sapphire-radeon-r9-290-review-our-first-custom-cooled-290/3

Just had a look at that and funny how they do 4 beches of CoH2 with it being the only card that beats the 780Ti. The rest of the benches is one per game. All review sites are guilty of bias, this we know but you can still get a good idea of what is what from them.

 

[LtMatt]

Just had a look at that and funny how they do 4 beches of CoH2 with it being the only card that beats the 780Ti. The rest of the benches is one per game. All review sites are guilty of bias, this we know but you can still get a good idea of what is what from them.

It is strange, but they also do four benches of Crysis Warhead and it loses everyone to the 780TI. Anyway the point is, the Sapphire Tri-X 290 Pro would be a good match for a 780ghz i reckon as the Sapphire 290 clocks very well and its cheaper. It would be a better comparison i think than a 290 reference card.

 

[Gregster]

It is strange, but they also do four benches of Crysis Warhead and it loses everyone to the 780TI. Anyway the point is, the Sapphire Tri-X 290 Pro would be a good match for a 780ghz i reckon as the Sapphire 290 clocks very well and its cheaper. It would be a better comparison i think than a 290 reference card.

haha, I see what you mean and I didn't bother going too far into the review but any game the 290X wins, they do 4 benches of to hyperbolise the 290X's wins

 

[LtMatt]

haha, I see what you mean and I didn't bother going too far into the review but any game the 290X wins, they do 4 benches of to hyperbolise the 290X's wins

This is the whole point, its not a 290X. Its a 290 Pro and its this card. £20 cheaper than 780 ghz that H reviewed and surely a better match for a overclocked AIB 780 card than a reference 290.

 

[haszek]

Non reference 290x is cheaper than gigabyte ghz, weird comparison... One of the best 780 versions with basic way cheaper card.

 

[Gregster]

This is the whole point, its not a 290X. Its a 290 Pro and its this card. £20 cheaper than 780 ghz that H reviewed and surely a better match for a overclocked AIB 780 card than a reference 290.

£20 is £20 however, you have to take the whole picture into account and not the odd game here or there (unless you only intend on playing those odd games) and for the whole picture reasons, I could forego £20.

 

[LtMatt]

£20 is £20 however, you have to take the whole picture into account and not the odd game here or there (unless you only intend on playing those odd games) and for the whole picture reasons, I could forego £20.

The point is its a fair comparison. £20 is not much in it either way i agree.

 

[Panos]

Given the price of the 780 Ghz, a 290X makes more sense.

If it was at the same price as my PNY XLR8* back in November though, it could be a bargain.
*(@1060 factory overclock, I have it running at 1293 without modded BIOS)

 

[Gregster]

Given the price of the 780 Ghz, a 290X makes more sense.

If it was at the same price as my PNY XLR8* back in November though, it could be a bargain.
*(@1060 factory overclock, I have it running at 1293 without modded BIOS)

Isn't XLR8 DDR3?

 

[Rroff]

The 780 ghz is such a brilliant card especially as I got mine on today only deal for under £400 - clocked to 1289/6800 just powers through everything with temps in the 60s so no boost throttle.

Would have been interesting to see wf3 290 v wf3 780 tho as the cooler is a lot of what makes the 780 ghz so good.