R9 290 VS GTX 780 Ti MID 2018

[Tommy_Here]

So looking at the below there's 2 games were the 290 beats the 780 Ti, the rest the Ti pulls ahead therefor would be matching 290x.

Can we say that Kepler has been totally forgotten about? I just think Nvidia nailed their drivers sooner than AMD and the Ti can still pack a punch today.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGXYoViO90c

 

[passifid]

not really considering the 290 at release of the 780ti was $399 and the 780ti was $700. Even the 290x was $550 at release of 780ti (i know it was much more before the ti hit but then so are the 80s usually.
The 290 in 2014 was compared performance wise to the 770 2gb and 770 3gb with the 3gb usually costing more (at the time the 770 were performance competitive too). that's why it was forgotten because you have to compare the 780ti to the 770 competitor.
AND it still costs more than a 290x

Also video is not great TR reboot is a hairworks title and last one looks to be massively in AMD favour. I would expect the 780ti to pull weight against a plain 290 and in the second hand market has a higher retail value than a 290x still. Love me the maxwell and pascal cards but the kepler aged badly.

 

[Kaapstad]

The 290 cards have always been better performers at the higher resolutions, it is a pity that this was not tested.

The 780 Ti also has a bit of a weakness with its memory (3gb v 4gb on the 290) and this shows up at the higher resolutions in some games.

And why did the tester not use DX12 in ROTTR?

 

[Lokken86]

I'm pretty sure on release the 290 even got beaten by the gtx780. The 290x was beaten by the Titan and then the 780ti came out last and was even faster then the Titan still.

The TI version is up to 20% faster then the standard gtx780, but that's the one you wanna be comparing to 290.


Found a good comparison actually.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkjG-qw0iWc

Some games are close but the 290 has definitely aged better.

 

[Rroff]

Notice the use of the 5820K - I think maybe the Kepler cards possibly in combination with nVidia's driver hack for DX11 benefit a little from quad channel memory - I always got very good performance from my 780GHz edition when using my 4820K (quad channel memory) compared to the average for Kepler cards.

I'm pretty sure on release the 290 even got beaten by the gtx780.

If it was a good boosting (~1006+MHz) 780 yes - some models only boosted to around the reference boost of 900MHz (this is ignoring factory OC'd cards, etc.).

When I bought my 780 GHz edition it walked all over a friends 290X Tri-X or whatever it was which was one of if not the fastest 290X you could get - few months later his card was starting to catch up and last time we tested like a year ago or something it matched or beat the 780 in most cases - which was quite a turn around.

These days the 290(X) is the more accomplished card if you are stuck with choosing between them as it has more VRAM (a big factor in why I upgraded to the 1070) and Kepler cards fall down badly in certain applications.

Some games are close but the 290 has definitely aged better.

At least that looks a bit more realistic than so many mainstream sites that I'm not sure where they get their Kepler numbers from that show the 780 more like a 280(X) performance which is complete BS compared to the experience actual owners will get.