£250 to spend - 280x or 770?

[Gregster]

The 770 is generally a bit quicker out the box in most games but the overclocking ability of the 280X will surpass the 770 in most cases (unless you get a golden 770 of course). As you have no intention of swapping out screens, I would go with the cheapest/best warranty card out of those 2.

 

[rolypolyman]

The 770 is generally a bit quicker out the box in most games but the overclocking ability of the 280X will surpass the 770 in most cases (unless you get a golden 770 of course). As you have no intention of swapping out screens, I would go with the cheapest/best warranty card out of those 2.

Anand. 5V4 to the 770 by my reckoning on the games listed, hardly most games Gregster.

 

[humbug]

Anand. 5V4 to the 770 by my reckoning on the games listed, hardly most games Gregster.

Why not just pick the 280X out of it

Its 5: 280X to 3: 770.

 

[imginy]

I got that HIS 280x great card it's the quietest card I ever owned and my one clocks right up to 1275mhz.

 

[arc@css]

Drivers might have changed the results in Anand.

 

[LtMatt]

280X easily. No brainer.

 

[TheyCallMeAndy]

280x Definitely their a great card

 

[Marine-RX179]

Thanks for the advice guys. saving £50 more for the 290 sounds good, but with my monitor only 1080p and no plans for the future on getting better screen or sli/ crossfire, the 290 seems overkill.

Ill be running it with am EVGA G2 750 gold medal thingy, is this enough power for it, the specs recopmmend a 750watt at least.

290 is not really "overkill" for 1920 res if we were talking about the demanding games that's already and will soon be out. It would allow you to run max setting for longer. Paying 20-25% more for 20-25% more performance is really worth the investment. I mean look at people who are willing to spend £500+ for a GTX780Ti...comparing to the 290, they are paying 50-60% more money for around 10% more performance!

 

[Boomstick777]

Would save a lil more and pick up an R9 290. It's worth the lil extra for a lot more performance.

 

[JGStonedRaider]

Since performance is pretty close between 770 / 280X it's more about what features you'd like to use / need. I'd certainly agree that the 280x is better value but there can be other considerations.

For me Shadowplay is the reason I am with Nvidia, others may want AMD for TrueAudio etc.

 

[Marine-RX179]

Since performance is pretty close between 770 / 280X it's more about what features you'd like to use / need. I'd certainly agree that the 280x is better value but there can be other considerations.

For me Shadowplay is the reason I am with Nvidia, others may want AMD for TrueAudio etc.

Honestly wouldn't take chance with a 2GB in this time at age. Memory caching or not, it doesn't make sense to take risk on a 2GB card with games already using above 3GB vram at 1920 res.

Nvidia should not have been a cheapskate and should have launched the GTX770 with 4GB vram as default. Their card is cheaper to make than the 7970/280x, yet they want the same money (more actually at the time) while giving less.

 

[Darujhistan]

280x simples.

I think your best plan is a 290 now though it's a much better card for not all that much more.

 

[Krisali]

Another vote for 280x, tis' the better specced card. That's if you aren't going to spend the little extra to get a 290 ofc

 

[Doogles]

Thanks for the advice guys. saving £50 more for the 290 sounds good, but with my monitor only 1080p and no plans for the future on getting better screen or sli/ crossfire, the 290 seems overkill.

Ill be running it with am EVGA G2 750 gold medal thingy, is this enough power for it, the specs recopmmend a 750watt at least.

Get another two and eyefinity

EDIT: When I say another two I meant monitors, needed to be clearer on that!