MSI 290X Gaming Vs MSI 780Ti Gaming

humbug · 3 Apr 2014 at 17:10

Kaapstad said:
+1

One of my biggest complaints about any of the review sites.

Guru3d are very bad as they even get the results from different resolutions mixed up as well.

The only way to review and compare cards is at the same time and under the same conditions.

The other question about reviewing cards is should they use the latest drivers or the best drivers, they are not always the same thing.

They wouldn't have listed later NV drivers unless they used them to test the NV GPU's.

Why else would they have listed them and not the older drivers?

Kaapstad · 3 Apr 2014 at 17:19

humbug said:
They wouldn't have listed later NV drivers unless they used them to test the NV GPU's.

Why else would they have listed them and not the older drivers?

My comment about drivers is more to do with review practices than Guru3d.

When reviewing NVidia cards for example if the cards are run on the 320.xx family of drivers (review sites use a lot of older games), this will give better results than using the more up to date drivers.

I was questioning which should be used, I don't know the answer to this.

The same could be asked when reviewing AMD cards, should they use 13.11 or the 14.X family of drivers.

humbug · 3 Apr 2014 at 17:22

Kaapstad said:
My comment about drivers is more to do with review practices than Guru3d.

When reviewing NVidia cards for example if the cards are run on the 320.xx family of drivers (review sites use a lot of older games), this will give better results than using the more up to date drivers.

I was questioning which should be used, I don't know the answer to this.

The same could be asked when reviewing AMD cards, should they use 13.11 or the 14.X family of drivers.

Didn't Tonester0011 say the later NV are the faster ones?

With AMD in my experience 14.3 are the best ones.

Tonester0011 · 3 Apr 2014 at 17:25

humbug said:
They wouldn't have listed later NV drivers unless they used them to test the NV GPU's.

Why else would they have listed them and not the older drivers?

The 780ti was reviewed using the 331.70 drivers, the avg fps hasn't changed through the reviews, even though improvements have been made their reviews show no changes. Hence they don't retest the cards every driver update. Also the gaming card is 9fps quicker than the lightning?? Get over.

Kaapstad · 3 Apr 2014 at 17:25

humbug said:
Didn't Tonester0011 say the later NV are the fastest ones?

With AMD in my experience 14.3 are the best ones.

For benching and older games I think 320.xx are still faster (NVidia thoughtfully gave users the option of blowing up their cards to do this.

). The point is reviewers often use older games that can take advantage of this.

Gregster · 3 Apr 2014 at 17:27

Kaapstad said:
Trolls can be killed by fire, 290Xs should carry a troll health warning.

Guys, don't rip the review apart too much or there will come a time we have nothing. The forums have been very friendly over the last couple of days and even though I painted a pic of the 780Ti being the better card (I am a nVidia fanboy), I have made it very very clear that the price is massively in favour of the 290X.

By all means discuss but please keep it friendly.

whyscotty · 3 Apr 2014 at 17:27

Kaapstad said:
For benching and older games I think 320.xx are still faster (NVidia thoughtfully gave users the option of blowing up their cards to do this.). The point is reviewers often use older games that can take advantage of this.

Aye, 320.78 are the best - well with my cards they are

humbug · 3 Apr 2014 at 17:28

Tonester0011 said:
The 780ti was reviewed using the 331.70 drivers, the avg fps hasn't changed through the reviews, even though improvements have been made their reviews show no changes. Hence they don't retest the cards every driver update. Also the gaming card is 9fps quicker than the lightning?? Get over.

Where did you get that from? link please. the 780TI is listed as having been reviewed with 334.89, so unless you can substantiate your claim what they say on the review stands.

Kaapstad · 3 Apr 2014 at 17:28

Tonester0011 said:
The 780ti was reviewed using the 331.70 drivers, the avg fps hasn't changed through the reviews, even though improvements have been made their reviews show no changes. Hence they don't retest the cards every driver update. Also the gaming card is 9fps quicker than the lightning?? Get over.

If you bench 780ti against a GTX 690 the performance difference is a little wider than it should be. One of the reasons for this is the 690 can use the older 320.xx drivers.

Ian Evey · 3 Apr 2014 at 17:29

It's a shame that [h] did not do bf4 on that thing locked to amd users.

That would have been interesting.

8 Pack · 3 Apr 2014 at 17:32

290X Bargain!! Wins my vote on this one. But who plays games anyway??

Kaapstad · 3 Apr 2014 at 17:34

8 Pack said:
290X Bargain!! Wins my vote on this one. But who plays games anyway??

I take it you won't be getting a 4K monitor any time soon.

Tonester0011 · 3 Apr 2014 at 17:34

humbug said:
Where did you get that from? link please. the 780TI is listed as having been reviewed with 334.89, so unless you can substantiate your claim what they say on the review stands.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/geforce_gtx_780_ti_review,12.html

humbug · 3 Apr 2014 at 17:36

Tonester0011 said:
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/geforce_gtx_780_ti_review,12.html

Ah i see where your going wrong now, Wrong link Tone

. this is the one i posted. http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/msi_radeon_r9_290x_lightning_review,15.html

TheyCallMeAndy · 3 Apr 2014 at 17:40

Once red always Red 290's <3

jh30uk · 3 Apr 2014 at 17:41

8 Pack said:
290X Bargain!! Wins my vote on this one. But who plays games anyway??

Customers who buy a GPU for its primary intended use, who benches all day anyway apart from geeks? :confused:

Tonester0011 · 3 Apr 2014 at 17:44

jh30uk said:
Customers who buy a GPU for its primary intended use, who benches all day anyway apart from geeks?

primary use for graphics cards isbreaking world records, if you're not turning it up to 11 you're doing it wrong

Tonester0011 · 3 Apr 2014 at 17:49

also @hummers....lol.

tommybhoy · 3 Apr 2014 at 18:07

For our overclocking efforts, we set the power limit to +50% (the maximum allowed) and the voltage to +50mV and started to dial up the clock speeds. We began by adjusting the Core Clock clock within Afterburner until we began experiencing instability (note that we had to unlock the voltage modification option within Afterburner and reboot in order to gain access to that functionality). We were able to do some gaming with the base clock set to 1160MHz, however it was not very stable at that speed. We backed down on the GPU speed until it stabilized at 1130MHz

Backed down clocks instead of adding moar voltage

...

[H], bunch a

when it comes to oc'ing, they haven't clocked a 290X past 1130Mhz yet, it's got voltage control for a reason.

No doubt about it, the 780ti is one mean mother, but if your going to oc, do it properly or not at all, my 290X can game@1100MHz on stock voltage all day long, to get higher clocks it needs moar voltage than 50mV, 100mV takes it to 1200MHz, 150mV 1240MHz, if it was under water, it would go higher on more voltage.

Gregster · 3 Apr 2014 at 18:11

^^

The final overclock of the MSI GeForce GTX 780 Ti GAMING 3G achieved an observed GPU clock increase of 26MHz and a memory increase of 400MHz GDDR5 effective rate.

Seems like they didn't clock the 780Ti very well either

@ Humbug. They used 332.21 drivers for the 780Ti (an older bench they did confirms the same bench results) and for the 290X, they used 14.2. If anything is at a disadvantage, it would be the 780Ti, as we have had performance enhancing drivers since those days.