• 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.

gtx970 or r9 390 for 1080p

jbh110tdi

jbh110tdi

jbh110tdi

Associate
Joined
3 Aug 2014
Posts
2,470
Location
Slamannan Falkirk
my head hurts with all this..

some reviews list the 970 as the better card others list the 390 as the better card..

Im leaning towards the 970 for less power usage, better driver support, faster 1080p? and hopefully shouldn't be that noisy..

whats you're thoughts?
 
Flip a coin. Either will do you well. :)

Choose a model that you like the look of / cool + quiet enough in reviews / reasonable warranty, etc.
 
Everyone will say get the 390 for the extra ram, but in my opinion Nvidia performance seems smoother. In terms of frames they're probably about even, but if you don't become VRAM limited the GTX 970 should clock high enough to beat the 390 which won't have as much head room to overclock.

Really you will do fine with both, but in the future maybe the R9 390 will last longer.
 
SouthEastBlue said:
Everyone will say get the 390 for the extra ram, but in my opinion Nvidia performance seems smoother. In terms of frames they're probably about even, but if you don't become VRAM limited the GTX 970 should clock high enough to beat the 390 which won't have as much head room to overclock.

Really you will do fine with both, but in the future maybe the R9 390 will last longer.
Click to expand...

Unless you have used a 390 how can you say the 970 is smoother? I've used a 970 and I can say that smoothness is about the same for both vendors.
The 8GB will usually be better for any game that does require a bit extra or streams a lot.

Overall the 390 is faster at 1440P or higher and has a clear lead in the latest games such as Battlefront and the DX12 demos.
 
Wouldn't say it's as simple as the 970 clocks higher as they'll both perform within reach of each other, win some lose some game dependant, mine did anyway.

If your in to broadcasting, Nvidia hands down, if you want vram security, then it's AMD hands down.

If the above isn't a concern, as arc said flip a coin as both have great single gpu driver support.
 
I've had a 290 clocked higher than any 390, it's technically the same GPU with extra ram and the Nvidia GTX 970/980 I had were smoother. It wasn't anything to do with frames per second either as the 970 while faster (was also overclocked) it wasn't that much faster than my 290.
 
Out of those two cards the XFX 390 looks better quality, and has a back plate. You won't go wrong with either, but I don't really like the look of that 970 model.
 
The performance difference won't really be something you can tell apart unless you stick an fps counter on the screen.

Personally I think the 390 is the better buy. Not because of the ram but because it does outperform the 970 more often than not and it hints at a longer shelf life IMO.

We still don't know if the current Nvidia cards will be at a disadvantage with future DX12 titles, They may not but we do not know for sure so why chance it.

SouthEastBlue said:
I've had a 290 clocked higher than any 390, it's technically the same GPU with extra ram
Click to expand...

Factually right but technically inaccurate.
The Grenada cards have had improvements made to the supporting bits (That's my attempt at techno babble :)) on the pcb that improve it a lot and make it the better choice on air. Sure some people got great results with there Hawaii chips but that's the silicon lottery at play.

Was your better clocking 290 with volts and water or air?
 
Last edited:
AMD are also rumoured to release some 'special' Omega style drivers in November. May give a boost to the 390 putting it even more ahead of the 970.
 
nashathedog said:
Factually right but technically inaccurate.
The Grenada cards have had improvements made to the supporting bits (That's my attempt at techno babble :)) on the pcb that improve it a lot and make it the better choice on air. Sure some people got great results with there Hawaii chips but that's the silicon lottery at play.

Was your better clocking 290 with volts and water or air?
Click to expand...

It's the same GPU, but not the same graphics card so nothing inaccurate at all - a GPU is not a graphics card. The performance at the same speed where not ram limited has been shown to be exactly the same 290/X vs 390/X, it has different power delivery or whatever they've changed to the board and 4GB additional ram that is it.

My 290 was on air, would run 1150 with negative volts, over 1200Mhz with additonal volts but the card run 85+ celsius and was a monster power puller so I didn't wanna keep it when my GTX970 at 1450Mhz was getting better frames at lower temps.
 
That's what makes me lean towards the 970 is lower power usage, and hopefully lower temps and should run silent compared to my 7950. I also like the idea of the 5 year warranty with the zotac. I'm not fully decided on brand as also looked at the evga 970
 
I went for the r9 390 which I've had installed a couple of days and I must say very impressed although the I'm only learning and still new so no expert.

The card runs in mid 70s when playing a game on ultra settings and I don't hear it at all even when I manually turn the fan up.

Great looking card as the msi of red and black is your thing
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom