The GTX 970 - Why would you NOT buy this card?

tommybhoy · 25 Sep 2014 at 00:31

Moonchild said:
Seriously though, if your budget was around the £250 to £280 mark, why wouldn't you?

Because when I bought my 290X@£320 11 month ago, it's just as fast, even went CrossFire-that cost me another:

0p=FREE

Obviously my situation is a one off but that certainly removes the leccy conundrum for this here Bhoy.

When all is said and done, there is no doubt the 970 is a hard, hard card to beat, the only thing right now on current prices remotely in favour of the 290 is the SC/Alien +1 game package-but that won't last long unless the 290 can hit a £200 pp.

If I was upgrading today I'd be going back to green team, sidegrading from 1x290 to 1x970 no chance, that is insane, they both perform very very close in game, I defy anyone that can 'see' the difference imho.

rolypolyman said:
as a 290 owner I'm keenly watching the price of 290's with a view to xfire, no point in going 970 for me and that 256bit bus has to bite at some point soon.

290 CrossFire internal venting coolers are hot, temp wise-be it mass flow air case or not-overall, dumps out serious heat, temps are cooling up in ayrshire though

.

If your psu can run both then it's a lot cheaper and all you need to do get the heat under control is fit an aio/Kraken bracket for the top one and core temps plummet.

If you need a psu, then If funds permitted I'd go 970. :eek:

chaparral · 25 Sep 2014 at 00:36

3t3P said:
8800GTX that was hella nice back in the day

But a single one was not fast enough to run crysis at the time (back in 2007)... :mad:

tommybhoy · 25 Sep 2014 at 00:37

@almighty15, Jono8 and Ayahuasca,

Benching, 970 I think will be fastest.

Gaming, I put it to you/everyone:

10 people sat in a room testing 2 PC's-290-790 on a variety of games, they wouldn't have a clue.

Ayahuasca · 25 Sep 2014 at 00:39

Yeah in games the 290 will be faster in some, the 970 in others.

When both are overclocked to near their limits they're pretty well balanced.

MOOGLEYS · 25 Sep 2014 at 00:53

Moonchild said:
Seriously though, if your budget was around the £250 to £280 mark, why wouldn't you?

Because what I have does not struggle and there will be a better version of the 980 along soon.

wazza300 · 25 Sep 2014 at 00:59

whats wrong with a used 290?

can a new 970 compete with the price of that?

Sasahara · 25 Sep 2014 at 01:00

So far I'm holding back for Pascal since I'd have to go Sli 970, but it's very tempting. :<

win8.1 · 25 Sep 2014 at 01:00

easyrider said:
Stop talking nonsense

Amd 285 tonga 170 quid

Gtx 970 259 quid

Do the math and bang for buck

When the 290 was launched for a similar price as the 970 1 year a ago with the same performance it does not sound such good value for those looking top end cards not 256bit cut down versions of the full fat cards. Even those who are coming from older cards should have been getting much better performance only Nvidia know they can sell the gimped versions first and then sell the real top end cards later and they definitely won't be good value knowing their track record unfortunately.

Going by Amd's cards now Nvidia's 970 looks good value to those with older cards than the 290 but when Amd produced the same bang for buck performance 1 year ago I don't see how it's going to be very long before Amd take back that bang for buck crown with real top end cards at a similar price to the 970. Looking at bang for buck and math's without seeing that then yes the 970 does look good value for money.

Ian Evey · 25 Sep 2014 at 01:35

Almighty has the fastest 290 on earth that beats every nvidia card going didn't you know :eek:

easyrider · 25 Sep 2014 at 01:37

win8.1 said:
Looking at bang for buck and math's without seeing that then yes the 970 does look good value for money.

Yes so you agree with me

Fact is we are all drip fed tech. It's a game of when we buy and when we sell....

Full fat NV cards will hit...but right now they don't need to...

For once I feel the pricing of the gtx 970 is fair...

It's new tech and runs cool....low power and creams amd tech bang for buck and performance per watt.

The gtx 970 is a milestone in....what's been boring tech gfx wise in the last few years...

easyrider · 25 Sep 2014 at 01:40

wazza300 said:
whats wrong with a used 290?

can a new 970 compete with the price of that?

What a few beers and a curry.

In the coming weeks we will see 290 in MM being sold for less than 150 quid....

PC hardware is harsh....and one soon realises that it's not the game to invest in.

humbug · 25 Sep 2014 at 01:42

Moonchild said:
Seriously though, if your budget was around the £250 to £280 mark, why wouldn't you?

Already have a similar performing card.

Wizzfizz · 25 Sep 2014 at 02:05

easyrider said:
What a few beers and a curry.

In the coming weeks we will see 290 in MM being sold for less than 150 quid....

PC hardware is harsh....and one soon realises that it's not the game to invest in.

This is coming from the guy who has built two full home cinema rooms/building?

But yeah, I agree, it's not the film one invests in

You're right.

win8.1 · 25 Sep 2014 at 02:44

easyrider said:
Yes so you agree with me

Fact is we are all drip fed tech. It's a game of when we buy and when we sell....

Full fat NV cards will hit...but right now they don't need to...

For once I feel the pricing of the gtx 970 is fair...

It's new tech and runs cool....low power and creams amd tech bang for buck and performance per watt.

The gtx 970 is a milestone in....what's been boring tech gfx wise in the last few years...

I agree that the 970 looks good value for money now but only if we compare it with a 285, take the 1 year old 290 with similar price performance and the real top end Amd cards that are bound to come soon out of the equation.

Drip fed is a under statement with the 970 as it should have been coming out with at least 30%-50% more performance a year after the 290 at the same bang for buck price. Less power consumption is good but when it only really creams it in that one year later and new tech performance does not increase it does not appear such good value or best bang for buck then.

Marine-RX179 · 25 Sep 2014 at 05:28

Ayahuasca said:
1. Still too expensive for some.

2. People already have equivalent performing cards.

3. Some people prefer AMD.

And extension to 2:

Because it is not 40% or more faster than the 290/780, but more like 0-3% faster.

UTmaniac · 25 Sep 2014 at 06:28

easyrider said:
Stop talking nonsense

Amd 285 tonga 170 quid

Gtx 970 259 quid

Do the math and bang for buck

Or an AMD R7 265 new (with silver Never Settle) for £90 back here earlier this year.

TGReaper · 25 Sep 2014 at 06:28

Waiting to see if the red team show their hand today

almighty15 · 25 Sep 2014 at 06:50

And TBH I would by this over a 970

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-044-KF&groupid=701&catid=1914&subcat=1341

JediFragger · 25 Sep 2014 at 06:52

TGReaper said:
Waiting to see if the red team show their hand today

Confirmed by AMD directly to be nothing coming;

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=26956415&postcount=419

Scramz · 25 Sep 2014 at 07:10

razorpakk said:
I had a 780 Amp! edition, basically as fast as the 970s, but I made the jump immediately. My 780 is on ebay already at 200£ with still four days left...

Replacing vga every year is actually cost effective when you consider the resale value.
This was just to say that even in my case I just Had to buy it.

I second this, I find updating hardware on a regular basis does end up being as cost effective as building a new system every 3-4 years due to resale values.

Then atleast you always have the up to date gear. If you into that of course.