-
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
Associate
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 87
This is just wrong
Associate
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 87
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.
This is entirely fair. I went for 390 because a bit cheaper and a bit better performance. If the 970 had been cheaper would have been a harder decision as I only wanted a cheap upgrade pending pascal etc.
You can ignore what he says, he comes of a bit fickle from what I seen. Anyone saying 970 is overall a much better card then a 390 should not be taken seriously.
Thanks.
I tend to alternate between the brands as I like to see what each vendor offers, but if I wasn't buying an Nvidia card this time around, then a 390/X or Fury Pro would have been my choice. I might have even gone for 390 crossfire, though my motherboard would ideally need replacing.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 23,700
- Location
- London
They trade blows. What sells it to me is the Nvidia software and drivers.
The only thing the 390 has other than a little more performance (like 5%) is more vram.
Whether or not its actually useful is another thing. Depends on resolution.
The other thing which might be important is async compute. DX12 isn't really here yet, but this generation of AMD cards might be better in this one area than the current generation of Nvidia cards.
Thats the situation in a nutshell.
The only thing the 390 has other than a little more performance (like 5%) is more vram.
Whether or not its actually useful is another thing. Depends on resolution.
The other thing which might be important is async compute. DX12 isn't really here yet, but this generation of AMD cards might be better in this one area than the current generation of Nvidia cards.
Thats the situation in a nutshell.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 23,700
- Location
- London
Huge gaps measured in months between drivers, beta, beta, beta, Game Ready Drivers as and when. The full suite of extras you get under the Game Works tag, most of the top AAA titles are Game Works as well.
Huge gaps don't mean much when single gpu works, doesn't matter if they are beta either if they you know-work, GRD come out thick and fast because they don't always work and tend to be fixing things.
Of course GW's runs better on Nvidia, they make it and have complete access, they know exactly what's going on in the black box.
"Game Ready Drivers" is marketing speak to make you think they always have your back.
AMD release just as many Drivers as Nvidia and ready for the coming or just released games, they just haven't figured out that calling them something like "Game Ready Drivers" makes some people think the vendor is in some-way special.
Associate
- Joined
- 10 Jul 2010
- Posts
- 1,981
- Location
- Gtr London
Assuming the 290 is the same as the 390 when running at the same clocks then I can't see how it's faster than a GTX 970 - didn't go that way when I had both cards a month or two back.
Maybe the extra ram could maybe MAYBE make a difference in the future, but will it really have enough grunt to power any game taking up more than 4GB ram? Not come across anything yet that takes 4GB VRAM at 1080 rez.
Maybe the extra ram could maybe MAYBE make a difference in the future, but will it really have enough grunt to power any game taking up more than 4GB ram? Not come across anything yet that takes 4GB VRAM at 1080 rez.
Yeah, but the same goes for anyone saying the 390 is overall a much better card
Indeed. The difference is, no one thus far has made such a claim
As for better drivers, unless you are considering going multi gpu, then there is no difference. Don't let the marketing get to you.
The extra ram can come in handy for mods and stuff. Better to have then not.
The main thing the 970 has going for it for me is being a bit more power efficient, maybe less noise as a result. But we are talking a few pounds over the course of a year here, not exactly a big deal.
Forgot to mention, if you are into recording while playing with yourself, then the 970 has better software for that which is in favour of the 970.
Associate
- Joined
- 10 Jul 2010
- Posts
- 1,981
- Location
- Gtr London
Indeed. The difference is, no one thus far has made such a claim
As for better drivers, unless you are considering going multi gpu, then there is no difference. Don't let the marketing get to you.
The extra ram can come in handy for mods and stuff. Better to have then not.
The main thing the 970 has going for it for me is being a bit more power efficient, maybe less noise as a result. But we are talking a few pounds over the course of a year here, not exactly a big deal.
Forgot to mention, if you are into recording while playing with yourself, then the 970 has better software for that which is in favour of the 970.
This is OCUK forum right...I tried to argue this many times over but some people just can't understand how it all works. If you use settings that push around 4gb of vram on your card then most likely it's already running out of grunt. How come my 970@1505mhz at 1440p(and I don't suppose a 390 is faster than that) runs out of steam way before using up all the vram? It'll be the same with the 390, no matter what people wish, since it isn't actually any faster than a 970.
People say that vram requirements are bound to shoot up in the future but do the same people believe that OVERALL requirements will somehow go down?
If we can push such cards at mere 1080p, then how is the 390 supposed to use more than 4gb of vram in a years time without struggling? Yeah, you can crossfire but what's the point if it's still won't be enough to use close to max settings at 4k Besides, I'm quite sure most people simply won't bother when new cards arrive as a single gpu is always the best solution. The same with the magical DX12 overhead. I like both Nvidia and AMD, had both, liked both. I'm just allergic to ********.
Neither card is significantly better than the other. Actually, I think none of them is worth the money at this point in time.
EDIT: And I agree about the drivers, I'd say they're pretty equal. The only game I've ever had problems with on AMD was The Witcher 2, but that game was a bit finnicky anyways.
Last edited:
Permabanned
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 9,221
- Location
- Knowhere
From what I've seen with equal clocks while close the 390 is slightly faster than a 290 and so are the X models. There's very little between a 970 and 390 and one of several particular preferences can make one or the other the better option.
For example if you want to record then the 970 has the better software for it, but if you want to game with mods the 390 has more ram for it. For basic grunt the 390 is a tad ahead of the 970 but it is not by anything that actually matters. Okay it's a lot faster in SOM but then the 970's a lot faster in P'Cars. It's tit for tat.
Just get the right one for your poison.
For example if you want to record then the 970 has the better software for it, but if you want to game with mods the 390 has more ram for it. For basic grunt the 390 is a tad ahead of the 970 but it is not by anything that actually matters. Okay it's a lot faster in SOM but then the 970's a lot faster in P'Cars. It's tit for tat.
Just get the right one for your poison.
Except when it isn't running out of grunt, you don't understand how it works.
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014/06/11/asus_strix_gtx_780_oc_6gb_review_exclusive/3#.Vi6RKPnhCUk
Except when it isn't running out of grunt, you don't understand how it works.
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014/06/11/asus_strix_gtx_780_oc_6gb_review_exclusive/3#.Vi6RKPnhCUk
Oh, really? Thanks for explaining how it works then
And quite nice of you to post benches of a broken Ubisoft game, especially that both cards go as low as 30fps which proves my point, breaching 4gb of vram and neither can hold 60fps.
Anyway, try Witcher 3 or GTA 5 at ultra, see you vram usage and framerate, then report back and play the wiseass card. Or just wind your neck in if you still don't understand
Last edited: