I thought it was 3rd party sites doing those DX12 tests where AMD GPU's were pulling ahead, not something AMD did.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
R9 390 or GTX970? Whic one?
- Thread starter Rushersauce
- Start date
I thought it was 3rd party sites doing those DX12 tests where AMD GPU's were pulling ahead, not something AMD did.
Burgess_101
Member
Just the MSI R9 390. It's really quiet I must say that is probably the biggest plus to the card in my book. I can't speak for heat, my room is an anomaly in my house and is hot not matter what but the card sticks to 61 at idle and the fan is on at 4% usually for me and that also is inaudible and that is with an overclock.
It's a top card I must say, I had a reference 780 before and I loved it as well.
I can't say anything bad about the 970, its a good problem to have. I game at 1440p though so that pushed me towards the 390.
If is power hungry but I use an Antec Truepower 650w bronze and it handles it with an overclock on the CPU and GPU.
I've been wondering the same thing OP. I'm more than satisfied with my 280X, but I'm thinking it's showing its age for the new games. I have a 60Hz 1080p IPS monitor and I'm not planning on upgrading my screen for the time being, so cards like a Fury X or 980 Ti are overkill and out of the question. I've been eyeing the 970 as well, but I have to admit the whole 3.5GB fiasco made it lose some goodwill on me.
So MSI is good if one want something quiet? I know the MSI GTX 970 has gotten good reviews (especially when it comes to noise) and my friend recommends it.
The cards i've been looking at all seem to be MSI's...
Burgess_101
Member
There are a few reviews out there that compare noise I think. I personally don't think you can go wrong with Sapphire or MSI.
Pretty much what I intended to write. The 390 might suffer in heavily CPU limited DX11 games though. I believe this warrants mention.
Strong quad core recommended if you are going AMD.
Bolivar687
Banned
You should read a couple reviews on the cards, or even the posts from owners here, and you'll know why it's odd people are still trying to push this narrative.
justgames7604
Member
It's not hotter or louder at all though, unless you're going reference and I wouldn't reccomended that unless you're doing sli or cross fire since the heat passed into the case and the proximity of the cards impacts performance. A non issue for single card set ups though. The 390 hits about 75 degrees under full load, same as any other after market cooler card really.
It's not FUD, the benchmarks show it.
Call it better driver support, whatever you want, but we all know it's architectural.
Most reviews i see usually show AMD cards (reference or third party) as having greater noise than Nvidia ones (reference or third party).
That said, i'm not sure how big difference is noticeable, because i figure i have no idea how x decibels actually sounds like.
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
Spot on, this "hotter and louder" is a bit of nonsense as both the MSI and Sapphire 390's run super quiet and cool. I'll say again, anyone concerned need merely read a couple reviews of the MSI Gaming 390 and the Sapphire Nitro 390.
Point is you're splitting hairs when you're comparing (figures out my arse) 30 dB and 32 dB load noise levels. Both are pretty inaudible levels of sound.
Well, true, i guess.
Apparently 10 dB increase sounds like the volume has double, which probably is noticeable.
But what if the noise is, say, 4-7 dB higher? (made up figures) How noticeable is such?
Core temps and heat output are not the same thing though, yes, most of the 390 coolers can keep the GPU core at around 70c under load but the heat output is much higher than that of a 970 so the fans on the 390 have to work harder to keep it at the said temps, thats also why the 970 coolers are generally quieter. I had a strix 970 before the sapphire 390 I have now and it was definitely quieter, I also have an ITX build and the heat that the 390 dumps into the case gets the temps of the CPU and the motherboard up by 5c despite the decent airflow and the Noctua fans. Hawaii chips just run hotter than Maxwell and there's no way around it.
Well, it turned to FUD some weeks ago, you should go and read that thread again.
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
Well you'll probably notice 5 dB increase in a quiet room. But I don't think the noise gap between the best non-ref 970 and 390 is that big.
They say anything under 30 dB is all but inaudible.
qa_engineer
Member
I went with the R390X just because it performs better at higher resolutions, and AMD cards have shown a big jump in performance on DX12. Once the price drops even further I will get a second mSI card to run in Xfire. I
Could you post a link to what made it FUD. I thought it was well known that that maxwell architecture isnt as good at scheduling compute jobs in async and requires a rather slow context switch?
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
Ok, fair enough, in a poor airflow ITX case (and virtually all ITX cases have poor airflow owing to their cramped interiors), the 390 is going to run hotter.
But for the maJority of user scenarios where a 390 is sitting in a ATX or even mATX case with good airflow, you aren't going to notice any perceptible heat differences.
icecold1983
Member
change that line to "better dx12 performance" and its not fud.
justgames7604
Member
the difference in temp for a standard build would be 1-2 degrees. and the decibels have been measured and its literally 1-2 difference not something to worry about (this is for an msi card I believe) cant say anything about your sapphire. I can understand a mini ITX build suffering from this though.
not saying anything about the 970 I got 3 of them and no 390. Just parroting back what I read. The 390 is cheaper and performs better for the most part. Its all just what I've watched and read, that's all.
Ranger Taffles
Member
I'm in the same position as OP's and this seems like a good place to evaluate over my choices.
Can someone though explain me if Gigabyte R9 390 is worth it? I mean locally only the Gigabyte variant is available and I want to know if there are any issues about it. Same with 970 too by the way, it's only available in Gigabyte here locally.
So in that sense which card really works better if I want to do 1080p gaming? I mean I'm leaning more towards the R9 390 just because it seems to be better in lasting 2-3 years.
Can someone though explain me if Gigabyte R9 390 is worth it? I mean locally only the Gigabyte variant is available and I want to know if there are any issues about it. Same with 970 too by the way, it's only available in Gigabyte here locally.
So in that sense which card really works better if I want to do 1080p gaming? I mean I'm leaning more towards the R9 390 just because it seems to be better in lasting 2-3 years.
CaptainZombie
Member
I agree with this. In an ITX build, the 390 does heat up the case quite a bit. I had a MSI 390 which is a great card BTW in my 250D, but even in that case which is a larger ITX case there was quite a bit of heat when compared to my MSI 970. The card would stay about 61-65 degrees which is nice, but it was dumping making the side of the case very hot to the touch even with adequate cooling in the case. I think both cards are great and you can't go wrong with either IMO.
Most of the 970's perform about the same. It's more of a preference at this point. I would suggest staying away from the EVGA SC 970's. If you decide to grab an EVGA one, look for the FTW or SSC versions as these have improved heat sink designs. Other than that, the MSI and Gigabyte G1 are fantastic 970's. The Zotac AMP Extreme cooler is also pretty competitive price and cooling wise.
Pick whichever looks aesthetically pleasing to you.
If clearance is an issue for you, take a look at the GTX 970 ITX versions. They compromise on some sound and heat performance, but at stock they perform very well for their size.
Pretty much. Also access to CUDA for some applications help like rendering with NVEMC. If you really needed to penny-pinch on your energy bill, the 970 is a very good performance per watt card. Access to the rest of Nvidia's stuff like Shadowplay is convenient.
For some 970 using less power than 390 when under the load can be advantage in favor of 970. For most people who build own rigs this really isn't an issue because you aren't getting smallest possible PSU anyways. Other than that 970 isn't getting much over 390 as AMD has been improving with their drivers, and if GameWorks stuff isn't something you just have to have.
icecold1983
Member
lower power draw. if you will be playing a lot of dx9 titles, thats when nvidias driver support was actually a lot better. you had so many different options to use various forms of AA.
Like I said the GPU temps are not the problem, the cooler does a good job, it's just the heat output, the performance is also great, very happy with it. I don't know about the noise measurements but I can tell you that I hear the 390 fans easily while the 970 was virtually inaudible to me.
True, the heat output is not a problem in regular sized ATX cases with decent airflow but the noise still is if you are sensitive to it as I am, the GPU itself still manages to maintain decent temps under load though, I get 68-71c which pretty great.
Xplatformer
Member
SSAA is very, very expensive and requires pretty big trade-offs even on beastly GPUs for modern, technically proficient games.
It's affordable for older games sure. I wish I could "upgrade" from my 1080p monitor but I'm aiming for 60fps so that won't happen for some time. I don't think any GPU is truly "overkill" for 1080p just yet.
Rushersauce
Banned
Guys, waiting is not an option. Since I don't upgrade often I need something that lasts and my budget is limited. So, please, stay on topic.
I think that this thread has mostly covered all the issues related to your question.
I would consider the 390 more "future-proof". The 970 is not a true 4gb card and considering games target GCN first and foremost there is a degree of truth in the claims that the R9 300 and Fury lines are better prepared for what's coming next.
If graphics + compute concurrency is as big of a deal as AMD are making out, then it makes sense in your case to go for the 390.
The Sapphire or MSI, ASUS, Gigabyte models are excellent.
I have the feeling I'll have more reasons to move out from my 980 than those with already capable GCN cards.
The Lamonster
Member
What's better overall these days, AMD or Nvidia?
since when? the api's that interface with GPU's on pc are pretty generic. so you dont really target either specifically unless you start putting in vendo exclusive features like gameworks.
it depends on your budget / requirements
Agreed. AMD cards tend to hold up pretty well for their value considering how long some of their previous cards stayed relevant.
Because consoles have GCN under the hood. This is unprecedented, it means a game planning on shipping on those platforms need to seriously consider the GCN architecture at the very least.
Nvidia enjoys a superior marketshare on PC only, at the scale of the whole multiplatform environment it's not as relevant as their competitor's tech.
Simple as that.
Now, that does not mean Nvidia can't beat AMD at their own game in the future, but the thread is about Maxwell vs GCN R9 300.
icecold1983
Member
if you want the best performance, go with the 390. if you dont mind sacrificing performance for lower power consumption, go with a 970. but make no mistake, a 390 is faster, and all signs and historical precedent point to the gap widening as time goes on.
Mithos
Member
Well even a ITX version could be guesswork, its still not the length of the card that is the issue, but how many PCI-slots the cooler/fan takes up, and from what I can find the 970 and r9 390 have 40-50mm cooler/fans, while my current card have 35mm and just barely misses to interfere with the sata slots.
The Lamonster
Member
$400-700 and playing primarily Blizzard games
They are pretty small. The two currently on the market don't exceed 2 slots and are about an inch longer than the PCI-E bus.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125706
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121912
Xplatformer
Member
1920x1080???
As a game developer. The rendering code is largely completely different on a per platform basis, and whatever architecture the consoles use has little implication on the implementation on PC.
I'd personally recommend a GTX 980 for around $500 or a GTX980ti above that then. AMD isn't really good value at the higher end. BLizzard games can run on much cheaper hardware though. so If you want to save cash you might want to look into a gtx960 or a r9-280x
If it was me I would probably get a 380 and save the money to put towards a mid range 16nm card next year. It also has the advantage of giving more information on how the DX12 situation will pan out.
If you must have a 390/970 class card then I would go 390. It has more ram and historically AMD architectures have tended to last longer such as the 7970 vs the 680.
If you must have a 390/970 class card then I would go 390. It has more ram and historically AMD architectures have tended to last longer such as the 7970 vs the 680.
Same time Blizzard stuff seems to be a lot more CPU heavy / bound than GPU thanks to, what looks like, lackluster threading. I threw i5 6600K and 980Ti at Diablo 3 only to see game stutter and choke in more action heavy zones just because data isn't processed fast enough. ArmA games get a lot shit for bad threading, and for reason, but Blizzard isn't doing so hot either in that department.
icecold1983
Member
this is so wrong its not even funny
Bolivar687
Banned
This needs to be highlighted since the OP is talking about getting a card that will last. When you look at how the R9 200 series and GTX 700 series fared against each other as time went on, it's another point in AMDs column.
I know people like to argue it away but almost everything we've heard suggests Radeon is going to shine a bit more with DX12.
Cute Dragon Here
Member
Hmm...
What's your current power supply? How old is it? Is it still within warranty?
What's your current power supply? How old is it? Is it still within warranty?
care to elaborate? it was my understanding that you are mostly interfacing with sdk's?
Similar threads
- Poll