• 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.

R9 390 vs GTX 970 - Fight!

Performance is pretty close.

My preference is to the 390 due to the extra Vram which for me would give me piece of mind. I also don't like the 970's divided 3.5gb + 0.5gb to get 4gb as i feel it could lead to problems in the future when developers have more control over the gpu.

It's close but for me the above is what would swing things to the 390. If you plan on gaming over the 2 monitors then the 390 wins hands down as when the resolution goes over 1080p the 390 starts to flex it's muscles over the 970.
 
390, many recent games can easily use 4GB at 1080p, let alone with dual monitors. Yes you will never use all the 8GB on the 390, but it doesn't hurt to have excess when there is no price penalty. The 390 just generally is better suited to higher resolutions than 1080p imo.
 
Gregster said:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2883...d-radeon-graphics-cards-for-every-budget.html

Latest driver and games comparison here. See for yourself which is better :)
Click to expand...

Ignore this the results are all over the place and not a true reflection of performance. Every other site out there has the performance a lot closer. In this the gtx970 is just faster which is not the case end of story.

This reflects the real performance of the two cards.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/GTX_950_Xtreme_Gaming/30.html
 
Last edited:
Gideon Moss said:
Most importantly why is one better then the other?
Click to expand...

Vram if that floats your boat, more is better than what you don't have and always lasts longer on high end gpu's despite the running out of grunt spin.

When the shoe is on the other foot moars better (980Ti v Fiji);)

970 has Nvidia exclusive hardware gpu PhysX that AMD can't run.

The only other thing I can think of is Shadowplay on Nvidia it simply laughs in the face of Raptr if your into broadcasting and just want a simple free way to go about it.

Gamed on 290X and 970 for months now, outwith the specs/features, they both overclock believe it or not and pretty evenly perform.


Maybe we should ponder what runs out first, Maxwll and 3.5Gbturbo+.5Gbsnail support or AMD'S ability to stay afloat, get ready for the fight right enough.:D
 
Last edited:
TheRealDeal said:
Ignore this the results are all over the place and not a true reflection of performance. Every other site out there has the performance a lot closer. In this the gtx970 is just faster which is not the case end of story.

This reflects the real performance of the two cards.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/GTX_950_Xtreme_Gaming/30.html
Click to expand...

You can't just dismiss it. They tested on the latest drivers and for this reason, it is valid. A well documented and thorough testing was used as well, so I put stock in those results. Don't let bias cloud reasoning.
 
Gregster said:
You can't just dismiss it. They tested on the latest drivers and for this reason, it is valid. A well documented and thorough testing was used as well, so I put stock in those results. Don't let bias cloud reasoning.
Click to expand...

It's your bias that is clouding your reasoning. All above bar you accept performance is pretty similar. You put stock in a review that goes against pretty much all others. My reasoning tells me these results are not a true reflection. There has been no massive leaps on either side so latest drivers or not these results would be expected if Nvidia released a wonder driver but they haven't. Just because it's the most recent does not mean its the most legit. Anyhow since when did the men in the purple shirts become a good source.

Those who have owned both or at least a 290x accept the performance is pretty similar.
 
Last edited:
Can not be bothered to answer this with a thread title like the one the OP has used.

Too much brand bashing on these forums.:(
 
TheRealDeal said:
It's your bias that is clouding your reasoning. All above bar you accept performance is pretty similar. You put stock in a review that goes against pretty much all others. My reasoning tells me these results are not a true reflection. There has been no massive leaps on either side so latest drivers or not these results would be expected if Nvidia released a wonder driver but they haven't.

Those who have owned both or at least a 290x accept the performance is pretty similar.
Click to expand...

You do realise I have owned both the 290X and the 970 and know what is what? My 290X would clock to 1150Mhz and my 970 would clock to 1550Mhz and the 970 had the advantage. Plus you get all the extra goodies with Nvidia which make it a real plus in my book.

I am a stickler for testing and found the 970 was faster than the 290X in most cases.
 
The reality is, I bet if the software features (Shadowplay) were not part of the equation, Gregster would pick the 390 over the 970 for raw performance. He's just being a bit clever by picking some cherry picked results making the 970 look good and saying decide for yourself. If I could be bothered, I could pick out several recent benchmarks of the 390 outpacing the 970, but it's pointless. I have no agenda.

Like Kaap I said I shouldn't have even bitten with the title of this post, it's just baiting for "enthusiasts". Tbh if you blind tested the 390 against the 970 you would be lucky to see any difference, so pick whatever "winner" of the fight you like.
 
Last edited:
Gregster said:
You do realise I have owned both the 290X and the 970 and know what is what? My 290X would clock to 1150Mhz and my 970 would clock to 1550Mhz and the 970 had the advantage. Plus you get all the extra goodies with Nvidia which make it a real plus in my book.

I am a stickler for testing and found the 970 was faster than the 290X in most cases.
Click to expand...

The drivers have moved on since then by a good bit and i think back then the gtx970 was indeed faster. If you remember at launch the 390 cards had a big lead over the 290 cards all due to drivers. This along with a small clock bump is why the 390x now just about matches a gtx980 using a similar core to a 290x. Anyhow its not worth going on about your 1 review v just about every other review site in existence.
 
TheRealDeal said:
The drivers have moved on since then by a good bit and i think back then the gtx970 was indeed faster. If you remember at launch the 390 cards had a big lead over the 290 cards all due to drivers. This along with a small clock bump is why the 390x now just about matches a gtx980 using a similar core to a 290x. Anyhow its not worth going on about your 1 review v just about every other review site in existence.
Click to expand...

To say the AMD drivers have moved on is a misnomer.

They have improved yes. But still have big issues. Just look back at what happened over the course of this year alone (wasn't there like a few months gap (3 maybe more) between driver releases and every one was up in arms) also xfire support is absolutely awful compared to SLI support.

So yes, AMD improved, but its like saying wooo I now get a D where I used to get an F. I've improved!!
 
opethdisciple said:
To say the AMD drivers have moved on is a misnomer.

They have improved yes. But still have big issues. Just look back at what happened over the course of this year alone (wasn't there like a few months gap (3 maybe more) between driver releases and every one was up in arms) also xfire support is absolutely awful compared to SLI support.

So yes, AMD improved, but its like saying wooo I now get a D where I used to get an F. I've improved!!
Click to expand...

As an Amd user i can say most of this is tosh. There was a gap at the start of the year but that's the largest gap for years. It's usually one a month or more which it is now. Nvidia drivers have not been great this year either you only have to look in the driver thread to see this. As far as single cards go Amd are every bit as good as Nv atm. I will say that the software suite on the Nvidia side is superior but that's not drivers that's features that not everybody will use.

I am not going into Sli and Crossfire as that seems to switch around all the time as to who has it running better.
 
Last edited:
Easily the R9 390 imho. Best bang for buck mid / high end gaming GPU there is atm (Future price changes could change this)

You get similar / better performance than the 970 along with over twice the memory buffer. Grab a 390 and enjoy..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom