• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

MSI 290X or Sapphire 290 Tri-x

even though it's a 290 and not 290x? That's the thing I'm struggling with. The tri-x is cooler and seems to be the best 290. However, how does it compare the msi 290x?
 
even though it's a 290 and not 290x? That's the thing I'm struggling with. The tri-x is cooler and seems to be the best 290. However, how does it compare the msi 290x?

What res are you playing at?

In general terms the X is not worth the £££ over the non X, especially if you're getting a real good 290 non X like the Sapph tri-x.


Most x's in a sentence. Ever.
 
even though it's a 290 and not 290x? That's the thing I'm struggling with. The tri-x is cooler and seems to be the best 290. However, how does it compare the msi 290x?


At the moment it's about £70-80 more for a X version of a card. The difference in performance is something like 4 percent, which you'll get back by bumping the clocks a little bit. Unless you're gaming in 4K resolutions, I can't see they you're going to notice that difference, and even then we're talking a few frames a second.

So for me that large extra cost isn't worth it for such a small difference, making the non-X card far more attractive in price/performance. But if you have the money, and you want the fastest regardless, then you might prefer the X card.
 
Back
Top Bottom