-
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!
- Thread starter Gideon Moss
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,224
Lolz mitx 970 is faster than the 980 in SOM, greg that reviews a keeper.
Lol as i explained to him some of the results are all over the place but it's on the most recent drivers so is the most relevant. He's probably on steam laughing at me with Silent lol. I wouldn't blame him i do bite now and then.
What you mean like the threads you create to "stir the ****ers up some more"?
@OP
Get 970 for 1080P, if you plan to go 1440P then 390, although 8GB VRAM would be handy even @ 1080P imo.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,224
Def worth thinking about, but OS uses some of the slow ram, so it's not quite the full story that it has .5Gb less than normal 4Gb cards, but, that extra 4Gb the 390 has is peace of mind for longevity that's a surefire when you having it than not.
BF3, Skyrim, WD's, Wolfenstein, GTAV were all playable on higher settings v's the lower specced vram gpu's with comparable grunt, but the defenders are never anywhere to be seen when that happens.
They are very evenly matched cores all the same with other features that should be taken into consideration.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,063
- Location
- In a house
Got to agree with all the above, both are similar performance, but id take the 390 for its 8GB vram, over the 970s 3.5GB + slower 0.5GB.
Associate
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 87
I just upgraded to the 390 and delighted with the choice.
Chose 390 as marginally better performance at 1080p, increasingly better as resolution increases. More ran 8gb vs 4 (remember the 970 is 3.5+0.5 and people have noted issues). Finally the 390 is better value
Chose 390 as marginally better performance at 1080p, increasingly better as resolution increases. More ran 8gb vs 4 (remember the 970 is 3.5+0.5 and people have noted issues). Finally the 390 is better value
390
I have a 970 (got it before 300 series was released) but would prefer the extra VRAM for an attempt at future proofing.
The 970 hasn't let me down yet with GTA V and Witcher 3 (came with the card) running on high settings.
I have a 970 (got it before 300 series was released) but would prefer the extra VRAM for an attempt at future proofing.
The 970 hasn't let me down yet with GTA V and Witcher 3 (came with the card) running on high settings.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,224
Def worth thinking about, but OS uses some of the slow ram, so it's not quite the full story that it has .5Gb less than normal 4Gb cards, but, that extra 4Gb the 390 has is peace of mind for longevity that's a surefire when you having it than not.
BF3, Skyrim, WD's, Wolfenstein, GTAV were all playable on higher settings v's the lower specced vram gpu's with comparable grunt, but the defenders are never anywhere to be seen when that happens.
They are very evenly matched cores all the same with other features that should be taken into consideration.
+1 nice and balanced from a current user of the gtx970.
Grow up!
I guess the truth really does hurt....
And I am not the one who needs to grow up... I'm not the one who creates threads for the sole intent of stirring ****.
Lol. And then you got Gregster using such review and he wonders why people consider him an nvidia guy. How can someone impartial take results that is clearly so tampered with seriously?
The OP asked what was the better and I gave him a link of recent drivers and game results and that was that. Nothing to do with anything else and Nexus being massively off topic and baiting is pathetic and childish.
I don't like the thread title but that doesn't mean you can **** talk me!
Yeah reviews consistently have it 10 to 15% faster, its not a lot.
Edit: Greg calm down. ffs....
My perception / experience between the brands. 
390 :
vibrant / deeper colours / more striking contrasts;
smooth performance;
slightly faster than the GTX970 (less than 5%);
(in my experience) ATi / AMD have solid drivers;
more video memory for higher resolutions / vram hungry titles or mods;
generally run hotter;
consume more power (amounts to little in terms of £/$, though);
GTX970 :
generally lighter, paler colours - though still nice IQ imo;
even smoother performance;
slightly slower than the 390;
(in my experience) Nvidia have solid drivers;
less video memory, though a vast amount of the time this won't factor when playing at 1080p - or even higher;
runs cooler;
consume less power (amounts to little in terms of £/$, though);
Normally, one could also say that the 390 would be better value for money than the GTX970, but it would seem that they're both around the same price atm, give or take.
TLDR :
As Whyscotty said, flip a coin.
390 :
vibrant / deeper colours / more striking contrasts;
smooth performance;
slightly faster than the GTX970 (less than 5%);
(in my experience) ATi / AMD have solid drivers;
more video memory for higher resolutions / vram hungry titles or mods;
generally run hotter;
consume more power (amounts to little in terms of £/$, though);
GTX970 :
generally lighter, paler colours - though still nice IQ imo;
even smoother performance;
slightly slower than the 390;
(in my experience) Nvidia have solid drivers;
less video memory, though a vast amount of the time this won't factor when playing at 1080p - or even higher;
runs cooler;
consume less power (amounts to little in terms of £/$, though);
Normally, one could also say that the 390 would be better value for money than the GTX970, but it would seem that they're both around the same price atm, give or take.
TLDR :
As Whyscotty said, flip a coin.
Last edited: