-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
R9 390 or GTX970? Whic one?
- Thread starter Rushersauce
- Start date
Cute Dragon Here
Member
Either way, I think you probably should check out whoever is giving you the best deal, though I would totally love to overclock the MSI 970 to 980 levels. An overclocked 970 should perform like a 980 under most cases, and the 390 shouldn't be too shabby, either, but the 121W practical difference IS a big deal.
Nostremitus
Member
I have a 290X (slightly weaker than 390 and with only 4GB of VRAM)
I haven't had any issues with game drivers or overheating(Only Windows 10 audio driver issues that were fixed with a recent Windows update. It was forcing Motherboard audio and wasn't letting me use digital audio over DisplayPort. And Windows 10 forcing an old driver on me when it first launched, hasn't happened since, though...)
I game at 2560X1080@75Hz in a freesync monitor for what it's worth.
I haven't had any issues with game drivers or overheating(Only Windows 10 audio driver issues that were fixed with a recent Windows update. It was forcing Motherboard audio and wasn't letting me use digital audio over DisplayPort. And Windows 10 forcing an old driver on me when it first launched, hasn't happened since, though...)
I game at 2560X1080@75Hz in a freesync monitor for what it's worth.
zorlaczerohero
Banned
I went with a 970 for this very reason. I tend to buy a mid level card that will hit 1080p easily and then down the road when the price drops buy another to SLI it. Done that through 560ti, 660ti etc. Always been able to keep up with new games. The OP said he had a 600W PSU, that in itself means the 390 will always be alone, whereas a year down the line he could pick up a cheap 970, SLI them and still be hitting high settings on nearly everything.
neurosisxeno
Member
I would not trust Toms Hardware for most reviews. They have gotten increasngly bad with their testing methodology. TPU is the site I chose because they have very strict testing methodology and rebench all the cards periodically to verify their results.
Kaffeemann
Banned
I got a GTX 970 one year ago and am very happy with it.
If I had to make a decision now, I'd go with the R9 390.
8 GB is much more future-proof than 3.5 GB, AMD managed to improve driver performance in recent months and the Radeon cards look very strong in DX12.
The higher power consumption is the only downside. If it bothers you, try undervolting the card or lower the power target slightly.
If I had to make a decision now, I'd go with the R9 390.
8 GB is much more future-proof than 3.5 GB, AMD managed to improve driver performance in recent months and the Radeon cards look very strong in DX12.
The higher power consumption is the only downside. If it bothers you, try undervolting the card or lower the power target slightly.
I take this. Thanks for the info = )
Makoto-Yuki
Banned
R9 390.
I wouldn't buy any Nvidia GPU's at the moment except a 980 Ti.
R9 390 > GTX 970, R9 390X > GTX 980, GTX 980 Ti > Fury X
I wouldn't buy any Nvidia GPU's at the moment except a 980 Ti.
R9 390 > GTX 970, R9 390X > GTX 980, GTX 980 Ti > Fury X
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
AMD needs your money more, get the 390 
No honestly, the 390 is preferable if we're talking about the MSI 390. Runs silent at idle, 8GB memory and overclocks decently. Plus it'll handle DX12 games well.
No honestly, the 390 is preferable if we're talking about the MSI 390. Runs silent at idle, 8GB memory and overclocks decently. Plus it'll handle DX12 games well.
Makoto-Yuki
Banned
GTX 960 or R9 380.
both the gtx 960 and r9 380 bench lower than the r9-280x though? only problem i see with that card is that its 3gb ram instead of 4
Burgess_101
Member
Thats not really true in terms of noise. MSI 390 at 60c doesn't even turn on its fans. My room is ridiculously hot for some reason (not the card its always been that way) and you can't hear it.
I agree you can't go wrong with either, I personally couldn't justify Nvidias dealing with the whole 3.5gb fiasco. I am relatively happy with my 390 but I would go back to Nvidia providing the next cards are good value for money. I got my 390 at just £237 which is a bargain. If you can get a good brand cheap for either go for it, at the same price I would go for the 390 always.
Not exactly; downsampling becomes a much more viable option with the 390. Its worthy of consideration, at least.
Unknown Soldier
Member
AMD needs your money more, get the 390
No honestly, the 390 is preferable if we're talking about the MSI 390. Runs silent at idle, 8GB memory and overclocks decently. Plus it'll handle DX12 games well.
Unless you are a charity, whoever "needs" your money is irrelevant. Buying the product which is best for your personal needs is the only thing you should consider.
The DX12 thing is such a hilarious canard, I'm still waiting for DX10 to unlock the hidden power of the Radeon 2900XT.
Tacklemacain
Member
I would go with the 390. Nobody can realy say, if the vram feature will of the 970 will restric you in 1 or 2 years. Also the 390 seems to profit more from dx12. And if you choose the 390, get the Sapphire Nitro.
Hey, thanks for the tip! I thought I'd have to rely on AMD's lousy implementation of this or use a broadcaster like fraps or OBS in order to record everything all the time.
dgrdsv
Member
Performance will be of a much more concern with downsampling than VRAM. And if you'll have a title where performance will be ok in downsampling then chances are that it won't use even 4GBs of VRAM.
Tacklemacain
Member
If you can, i would wait for Pascal and Arctic Island. Your 7970 should handle most games fairly well in 1080p.
Shai-Tan
Banned
yup. I was playing Dragon Age Inquistion DLC with downsampling recently and I get horrible stuttering on the GTX 970 once it jumps above 3.5gb. Not sure how well it performs on 390X but 970 is annoying to play sometimes with downsampling where it will be smooth and then suddently start stuttering hard.
Nostremitus
Member
I went from the Asus ROG Matrix 7970 to my 290X...
To be honest, you could/should probably wait until the next year for a more ssusbstantial upgrade in that price bracket.
The 7970 is a workhorse. My old one is in my wife's build right now, still going strong.
glassgannon
Banned
Seriously most devs suck even with dx11 utilisation right now.. i dont see how one dx12 benchmark should be a big factor.
and unless dx12 was developed with the intention of screwing over nvidia, i dont see how it wont improve.
those benchmark showed a reduction in performance. that shouldn't happen,clearly the optimization is still on and it was a bug.
call it bias, but ive just had a much better experience with nvidia.
they may be asses to everyone else ,evil, monopoly , pay devs to make their version better etcetc
but in the end ,you get what you pay for.
and i care more about myself that who i end up endorsing with my choices.
and regarding vram.
downsampling isnt as easy as having more vram, thats just ONE limitation , if a game performs worse than 970 at 1080p than it will most certainly perform worse at a higher res.
the drop will be bigger on the 970 ,yes , but that's a different story.
also,theres a good chance that 2/3rds of the games that run hassle free downsampled on a 390 will do so on a 970 as well since theyre not very resource intesive to begin with
General Lee
Member
I switched from a 7970CF to a single 970. It has a bit less pure grunt, but not having to deal with CF was worth it. Compared to a single 7970 the jump is certainly worth it imo.
As for 390 vs 970, I'd say for 1080p it's a tossup and the choice is up to your preferences (G/Fsync, Shadowplay etc.), but for higher res and maybe for future titles the 390 is probably more future proof. 970 does have a bit more overclocking headroom which might help even out the difference, and it uses less power. Then again usually you can find a 390 with a good cooler for less than a 970. In the end either GPU is a good choice atm.
Frosty Droid
Member
Hmm...was looking to upgrade my 660 to a 970 for Fallout 4 before I saw this thread, I hadn't even considered the possibility of a 390. Looks like I have a bunch of reading to do.
I used to have a 970 but returned it during Memorygate. I recently picked up a R9 390 and couldn't be happier. Saved about $70 and have the comfort of higher performance at 1440p and a full 8GB to play with gives me more futureproof confidence. Performance-wise both run pretty similar at 1080p in my experience.
Eurogamer has picked the 390 over the 970 at its price point, and recently said it performs better on the Battlefront beta, so if you like a little more headroom for your buck, go with the R9 390.
And you have DX12 to look forward to, which seems to lean toward AMD at this point.
Eurogamer has picked the 390 over the 970 at its price point, and recently said it performs better on the Battlefront beta, so if you like a little more headroom for your buck, go with the R9 390.
And you have DX12 to look forward to, which seems to lean toward AMD at this point.
dgrdsv
Member
Sure, both are quite a bit faster than 7970 - +30-40% depending on a benchmark / mode.
You can't trick physics. 390 is consuming almost +50% of energy compared to 970. This means that it will be louder / hotter no matter what. Well, unless you'll use WC on it.
What Nostremitus said.
Going from 7970 to 970/290X isn't a very big improvement. You need to hit 980/Fury levels at least to feel a nice bump. I went from 7970 to 290X.
Loudness very much depends on the card and the cooler itself.
Heat does too, but people tend to look at gpu temps and assume cooler is better, without thinking of where the heat is going. A good cooler will keep the card cool and dump all that power into its surroundings.
dgrdsv
Member
I'm talking about more or less equal cooling situations obviously. There is no point in comparing temp/loudness of a card inside an oven to a card running under a liquid hydrogen. Which is essentially what most of people saying how quiet and cool their AMD cards are are doing.
Is R9 390X worth it over 390 or GTX 970?
I ask because i'm willing to drop another 100 for a graphics card but not 200 to get a GTX980.
That said, my current plan is to get 1080p monitor, so 390X might go to waste. OTOH, nothing's set in stone yet. 1080p largely because things start getting awfully small as the resolution increases, and not everything offers bigger font/zoom option.
I ask because i'm willing to drop another 100 for a graphics card but not 200 to get a GTX980.
That said, my current plan is to get 1080p monitor, so 390X might go to waste. OTOH, nothing's set in stone yet. 1080p largely because things start getting awfully small as the resolution increases, and not everything offers bigger font/zoom option.
Burgess_101
Member
Whether it affects a human being I'd a completely different matter so I don't really think that's worth discussing. Fact of the matter is I don't hear my card, I had a 780 before and that was the same so I don't really think it matters that much.
Mithos
Member
I'm looking at the same right now a GTX 970 or a R9 390, my problem however is...
I do not dare buy any of then because both cards risk "killing" 2 of my sata ports, because they are located just below the pci-slot and they are straight out from the motherboard, I MIGHT be able to fit a L-shaped sata cable there behind the GPU's, but that's just a MIGHT, not a CAN...
Been looking at the MSI GTX 970 Gaming and the MSI R9 390 Gaming cards.
The GTX 970 is probably the card that probably will interfere the least, it's not as thick as the R9 390 cards.
However running Skyrim a lot and with heavy modding and ENB's I'd prefer the R9 390 ...
I do not dare buy any of then because both cards risk "killing" 2 of my sata ports, because they are located just below the pci-slot and they are straight out from the motherboard, I MIGHT be able to fit a L-shaped sata cable there behind the GPU's, but that's just a MIGHT, not a CAN...
Been looking at the MSI GTX 970 Gaming and the MSI R9 390 Gaming cards.
The GTX 970 is probably the card that probably will interfere the least, it's not as thick as the R9 390 cards.
However running Skyrim a lot and with heavy modding and ENB's I'd prefer the R9 390 ...
Bolivar687
Banned
Yeah, people still trying to bring up heat/noise issues with the R9 300 series is a little odd...
Not sure why it is odd if people are sensitive to noise.
My biggest concern when considering an AMD GPU is the potentially greater noise.
EDIT And this is assuming one doesn't use a liquid cooling system or other very good system due to whatever reason.
Tacklemacain
Member
The MSI 970 only has a slight edge over the Sapphire 390, when it comes to the level of noise they produce.
justgames7604
Member
Don't go reference.
Cute Dragon Here
Member
Most important thing. Always opt for the video cards with a non-reference cooler if you don't multi-GPU. In addition to making things cooler and quieter, these non-reference coolers should also allow you to overclock better that what the reference design allows you.
Just remember to make sure your case's exhaust airflow is working fine if you go with them (which should be with a decent case these days).
Burgess_101
Member
I'm really sensitive, it does my head in, I literally can't hear my card though. As with any GPU, if you are using a good cooler it really isn't bad. Fact of the matter is, I'm never going to hear it because the fans are never on unless I'm playing and at that point I'm not going to be hearing it anyway.
dgrdsv
Member
So this FUD has settled in I see. Good job, AMD.
What kind of setup you have? The card and cooling?
We had to deal with years of driver FUD cmon :[
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
Anyone concerned about heat/noise of the 390 only needs to read one review of the MSI 390 to completely dispel those worries.
Tacklemacain
Member
The Sapphire one is even quieter then the MSI one.
Nostremitus
Member
My 290X has a triple fan cooler and the only times I've ever heard it make any sound louder than a whisper is when I've turned the fan on high in After Burner to see what it sounded like. I run mine OC'd as well. The reference cards are loud, most non-reference are not.
Similar threads
- Poll