# nVIDIA, AMD, what are the pros and cons of each side?



## Exodus (Jun 26, 2014)

Hey guys,

I'm going to buy a new rig this summer and I have some trouble choosing my side  What GPU do you recommend me that suits my needs.

I didn't told you my needs because I wanted to be sure you would answer my question and not just recommend a GPU. I just wanted to have a better idea of what both can offer before telling you my needs.

So here is what I am looking for in importance order.

1- Silence
2- Good performances
3- Great customization (Fan speed control, easy overclocking)
4- More details in games.
5- Good quality/price ratio
6- other things.

The games I will be playing are:

BF 3,4, ARMA III, Titanfall, Wolfenstein the new Order, Crysis 1,2,3, Thief, Skyrim, Watch dogs (maybe), All the Batman, Thief, Assasin's Creed unity, Rome II, LoL, DoTA 2.

My budget is:

prefered 350-400

maximum 400-450

I will be playing on a 120hz 1080p screen.

Have a great day.


----------



## cheesy999 (Jun 26, 2014)

Exodus said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> I'm going to buy a new rig this summer and I have some trouble choosing my side . So I would like to know what are the pros and cons of each side and which do you prefer and why? I'm not asking which GPU I should get. Just which side is better for my needs and I'l choose a GPU that can fit in my budget later.
> 
> Have a great day.



Well unless you're really in need of physx you should just buy the fastest gpu you can at the time

People on this site will argue about the drivers for years on end but unless you're dealing with more than 2 gpu's it's really down to luck more than anything else

If you use any programs that are going to try and use the gpu for calculations you should look into the performance of the cards your looking at, as in game performance  (mostly single precision) can often be very different from compute performance (mostly double precision)

But for the most part trying to pick sides is just going to result in you getting ripped off


----------



## Toothless (Jun 26, 2014)

Normally Intel/Nvidia is the "more powerful" combo while AMD is the "budget" way to go. Don't get me wrong, AMD does offer some pretty good GPUs and a mid-grade Nvidia can do a pretty good job.

Nvidia for power.
AMD for budget.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jun 26, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> Nvidia for power.
> AMD for budget.



or you can say for budget and power : 290/290X ... well more particularly 290... and Intel/AMD (and is quite powerfull a i5/290/290X can take head on a i5/780/780Ti while most of the time being a bit cheaper) can go together unless Intel hinder AMD gpu ... (what did they lie to me??? )


----------



## Toothless (Jun 26, 2014)

GreiverBlade said:


> or you can say for budget and power : 290/290X ... well more particularly 290... and Intel/AMD can go together unless Intel hinder AMD gpu ... (what did they lie to me??? )


Friend of mine perfers all AMD due to Mantle and almost every game he plays goes better with AMD anyway. Iunno, I guess it depends on what games you play.

Another difference is power consumption but not many still look over that unless it is summer.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jun 26, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> Friend of mine perfers all AMD due to Mantle and almost every game he plays goes better with AMD anyway. Iunno, I guess it depends on what games you play.
> 
> Another difference is power consumption but not many still look over that unless it is summer.


i only play BF4 with mantle but DX11/DX9 no problems at all, i have all kind of game some more AMD some more Nvidia but they run pretty much flawlessly on each type.

in the same perf range nV often got 1% above AMD (and sometime it's the opposite but it's safe to say: for the same performances = AMD cheaper) but the price/perf ratio tend to go red most of the time. (YAY for the death of GPU mining and price regularization  )


oh and for power consumption : well my 290 eats less than my old 580Ti Matrix SLI ahah x) (ok she eat way more than the 770 i had but for nearly the same price i don't mind)


----------



## erixx (Jun 26, 2014)

this is just my personal experience of 20 years of builds: I have had 10 different nvidia cards, 2 Ati, and a couple of other brands (voodoo,...)
The 2 Ati were not satisfactory. I do not like it when instead of gaming I have to edit, mod or do whatever to make it work. (I rarely enter nvidia settings because it just works)
But there is always a system, or a particular game or driver that do not work well together. And that's why  there are happy Ati users.


----------



## Hilux SSRG (Jun 26, 2014)

Exodus said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> I'm going to buy a new rig this summer and I have some trouble choosing my side . So I would like to know what are the pros and cons of each side and which do you prefer and why? I'm not asking which GPU I should get. *Just which side is better for my needs and I'l choose a GPU that can fit in my budget later.*
> 
> Have a great day.



List what your *needs are specifically *because they will determine greatly whether to get a $50-100-200-300-400-500-600-700-800-900-1000-1500-3000 dollar AMD or NVidia.


----------



## The Von Matrices (Jun 26, 2014)

I would choose a card based on its performance in the games you want to play.  Choosing a card based on its average performance over a number of games is misleading nowadays.  Both AMD and NVidia pay developers to favor their hardware in different games.  If you average all games it balances out and similarly priced cards appear equal even though in each game one side usually has a 10-20% advantage.  If most of the games you like to play are AMD sponsored games, then usually you should buy an AMD card, and if most of the games you like to play are NVidia sponsored games, then usually you should buy an NVidia card.


----------



## erocker (Jun 26, 2014)

Exodus said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> I'm going to buy a new rig this summer and I have some trouble choosing my side . So I would like to know what are the pros and cons of each side and which do you prefer and why? I'm not asking which GPU I should get. Just which side is better for my needs and I'l choose a GPU that can fit in my budget later.
> 
> Have a great day.


You didn't mention your needs.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jun 26, 2014)

I feel like these kinds of threads should be banned from all forums because its going to turn into a fanboy pissing match in a few more posts.


----------



## buildzoid (Jun 26, 2014)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> I feel like these kinds of threads should be banned from all forums because its going to turn into a fanboy pissing match in a few more posts.


But those are fun to watch.


----------



## OneMoar (Jun 26, 2014)

amd cheaper hardware more performace per dollor,crap software
nvidia Faster hardware, better software, expensive as fuck
./thread


----------



## erocker (Jun 26, 2014)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> I feel like these kinds of threads should be banned from all forums because its going to turn into a fanboy pissing match in a few more posts.


Once that starts happening the thread will be shut down. Folks with these kinds of questions should really look at reviews.


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jun 26, 2014)

I see this thread going nowhere 


But nonetheless we need system specs, res, budget, etc....


----------



## Vario (Jun 26, 2014)

Both are good buy what you can afford.



Lightbulbie said:


> Normally Intel/Nvidia is the "more powerful" combo while AMD is the "budget" way to go. Don't get me wrong, AMD does offer some pretty good GPUs and a mid-grade Nvidia can do a pretty good job.
> 
> Nvidia for power.
> AMD for budget.



This is only true for the current generation.  For a long time Intel and Radeon vs AMD and Nvidia was the marketed combinations. After Radeon was acquired by AMD, obviously the AMD CPU + GPU was promoted.  As far as card power, its the current generation where the AMD Radeon is the budget offering, thanks to Nvidia's absurdly overpriced Titan.


----------



## Exodus (Jun 26, 2014)

Thanks for all your answers guys. 

I didn't told you my needs because I wanted to be sure you would answer my question and not just recommend a GPU. I just wanted to have a better idea of what both can offer before telling you my needs.

So here is what I am looking for in importance order.

1- Silence
2- Good performances
3- Great customization (Fan speed control, easy overclocking)
4- More details in games.
5- Good quality/price ratio
6- other things.

The games I will be playing are:

BF 3,4,  ARMA III,  Titanfall, Wolfenstein the new Order, Crysis 1,2,3, Thief, Skyrim, Watch dogs (maybe), All the Batman, Thief, Assasin's Creed unity, Rome II, LoL, DoTA 2, WIldstar and Wow.

These are the one I remember.

My budget is

prefered 350-400

maximum 400-450

I will be playing on a 120hz 1080p screen.

I would also like to have your thougths on G-sync.


----------



## Vario (Jun 26, 2014)

I'd say for that price range, R9 290.


----------



## buildzoid (Jun 27, 2014)

Vario said:


> I'd say for that price range, R9 290.


With a custom cooler.


----------



## erocker (Jun 27, 2014)

Vario said:


> I'd say for that price range, R9 290.





buildzoid said:


> With a custom cooler.



Yes.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jun 27, 2014)

buildzoid said:


> With a custom cooler.



Sapphire Tri X or Vapor X for sure.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jun 27, 2014)

Vario said:


> I'd say for that price range, R9 290.


same, and also 



MxPhenom 216 said:


> Sapphire Tri X or Vapor X for sure.


seconded


----------



## Exodus (Jun 27, 2014)

Why the R9 290?



The Von Matrices said:


> I would choose a card based on its performance in the games you want to play.  Choosing a card based on its average performance over a number of games is misleading nowadays.  Both AMD and NVidia pay developers to favor their hardware in different games.  If you average all games it balances out and similarly priced cards appear equal even though in each game one side usually has a 10-20% advantage.  If most of the games you like to play are AMD sponsored games, then usually you should buy an AMD card, and if most of the games you like to play are NVidia sponsored games, then usually you should buy an NVidia card.



Yeah but I don't which games I'd like to try later one. So I'd rather choose I GPU on its general performances and power comsumption.



erocker said:


> Once that starts happening the thread will be shut down. Folks with these kinds of questions should really look at reviews.



Could you recommend me one please? I don't know who to trust lol



Durvelle27 said:


> I see this thread going nowhere
> 
> 
> But nonetheless we need system specs, res, budget, etc....



Not sure yet  .

either

I5 4690k
Asus VII gene
Fractal kelvin T12/S24/ Swiftech h220
mx100 256gb
Kingston fury 2x4 GB ddr3 1866
Bitfenix Aegis
Cooler master VSM 550w

or

I5 4690k
z97 atx board
Fractal kelvin T12/S24/ Swiftech h220
mx100 256gb
Kingston fury 2x4 GB ddr3 1866
Evga g2 750/850w
Phanteks Enthoo Luxe.


----------



## erocker (Jun 27, 2014)

Exodus said:


> Why the R9 290?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The card has the performance you need within your budget.

As for reviews, look here: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jun 27, 2014)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> Sapphire Tri X or Vapor X for sure.


Seconded also


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jun 27, 2014)

Exodus said:


> Why the R9 290?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Second system for sure.


----------



## Exodus (Jun 27, 2014)

Okay so I'll get a r9 290 then. As for the cooler choice, how does sapphire handle the RMA? Because the place it is available is on newegg.ca which don't really seems to be trustworthy.
Also, for silence, shouldn't I get a DirectCU II (I'll be buying with NCIX if I get any Asus components in my build so RMA is less of a concern in that case. )



MxPhenom 216 said:


> Second system for sure.



Nope first build ever lol. My brother's choice of getting an ATI radeon with a shitty cooler has traumatized me although.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jun 27, 2014)

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_290/
the review that decided me for a 290, thought i got a Reference design from ASUS i would strongly recommend a Sapphire as i wrote previously the Tri-X has my preference for the factory OC and cooling solution + potential for further OC if needed (i run mine 1000/1300 like a charm coming from a stock 947/1250) and as i play nearly all the game you mentioned, i don't need more than 53/50mhz more

i had only one RMA once on a 270X from MSI but you shouldn't worry too much for it, ASUS DCUII should be fine too
mind you my Ref 290 run 65% fan all time ahahah ... never got past 85° on opposite to 94° and throttling on auto profile  well not too noisy ingame with the sound and all, since i play often with my own playlist and the only noise my neighbor has to complain is Zardonic 10th anniversary mix

afaik a DCUII isn't too much more silent than a Twin Frozr IV for MSI or the Tri-X from Sapphire

sidenote ... consumption is overrated ... a 290 is not too much more power hungry than the others in range


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jun 27, 2014)

Exodus said:


> Okay so I'll get a r9 290 then. As for the cooler choice, how does sapphire handle the RMA? Because the place it is available is on newegg.ca which don't really seems to be trustworthy.
> Also, for silence, shouldn't I get a DirectCU II (I'll be buying with NCIX if I get any Asus components in my build so RMA is less of a concern in that case. )
> 
> 
> ...



No, wtf? The two systems you posted that you are trying to decide between, get the 2nd one. The last one you shared.


----------



## remixedcat (Jun 27, 2014)

nVidia has more stable drivers


----------



## erocker (Jun 27, 2014)

remixedcat said:


> nVidia has more stable drivers


Noooooooo!!! Well... maybe. Actually, no. Not in my experience. Unless you're using two or more cards, then... probably. Non-issue though in my opinion.


----------



## el etro (Jun 27, 2014)

1- Silence - Buy custom cards to care less about it, but Nvidia is sightly better on this. It may not affect your brand decision;


2- Good performances - Nvidia optimizes their games faster on their drivers, but the paradigm is changing on the last years. AMD is doing a better job with their drivers and optimization for newer games is coming on launch for the biggest titles;


3- Great customization (Fan speed control, easy overclocking) - Is an AIB related decision. Depends on what specific card you are trying to get(Ex: An Asus 290X DirectCU TOP card or a MSI HD7970 Lightning Boost Edition card);


4- More details in games - Any of them.


5- Good quality/price ratio - AMD;


6- other things - Depends of what features you want. Nvidia haves Physx, Gameworks, Hairworks, Cuda(not for gamers). AMD haves Mantle, TrueAudio, Eyefinity(That Nvidia haves too with another name), better 4k resolution support.


----------



## OneMoar (Jun 27, 2014)

erocker said:


> Noooooooo!!! Well... maybe. Actually, no. Not in my experience. Unless you're using two or more cards, then... probably. Non-issue though in my opinion.


unless you happen to be watching youtube with flash hardware acceleration enabled
in witch case enjoy your bsods


----------



## Exodus (Jun 27, 2014)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> No, wtf? The two systems you posted that you are trying to decide between, get the 2nd one. The last one you shared.



Lol I totaly misunderstood what you meant. But why the last one?



erocker said:


> Noooooooo!!! Well... maybe. Actually, no. Not in my experience. Unless you're using two or more cards, then... probably. Non-issue though in my opinion.



I might be making a dual GPU setup. I'm not sure if I should go with a mATX or ATX build.



el etro said:


> 1- Silence - Buy custom cards to care less about it, but Nvidia is sightly better on this. It may not affect your brand decision;
> 
> 
> 2- Good performances - Nvidia optimizes their games faster on their drivers, but the paradigm is changing on the last years. AMD is doing a better job with their drivers and optimization for newer games is coming on launch for the biggest titles;
> ...



What I meant by more detail in game was the little sparks and moving sheets of paper that physX adds. Does AMD haves an equivalent? And which card would you recommend me that suit my needs?


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jun 27, 2014)

Exodus said:


> Lol I totaly misunderstood what you meant. But why the last one?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Dude physx is in all of like 5 games.


----------



## Exodus (Jun 27, 2014)

So with a r9 290 I'll be able to max out 100-120fps on most game on 1080p with just a bit of AA? Also will I be fine if i make a crossfire setup or should I go nVIDIA?
And if I choose to go nVIDIA's side (which I don't think I'll do), which GPU should I get?



GreiverBlade said:


> http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_290/
> the review that decided me for a 290, thought i got a Reference design from ASUS i would strongly recommend a Sapphire as i wrote previously the Tri-X has my preference for the factory OC and cooling solution + potential for further OC if needed (i run mine 1000/1300 like a charm coming from a stock 947/1250) and as i play nearly all the game you mentioned, i don't need more than 53/50mhz more
> 
> i had only one RMA once on a 270X from MSI but you shouldn't worry too much for it, ASUS DCUII should be fine too
> ...



I'll be playing with headphones, but my brother and sister are at university and they're studying next to my room and I don't if they just try trying to piss me or if they have sonar like ears but any little noise can disturb them. So the more quiet the better.




MxPhenom 216 said:


> Dude physx is in all of like 5 games.



Which ones? Because I know Batman use physX but they might be other games on my lists I'm not aware of. If there is more then 3 it might become really useful.
And why do you prefer the second system?


----------



## erocker (Jun 27, 2014)

Check out the review section that I posted above for the R9 290. The reviews list various games and the performance you get in them.

The GTX 770 costs the same as a R9 290... but gives you less performance. You don't want that.



OneMoar said:


> unless you happen to be watching youtube with flash hardware acceleration enabled
> in witch case enjoy your bsods


I remember having that issue once in a while while using Internet Explorer a way back. I don't use IE now, no problems.


----------



## v12dock (Jun 27, 2014)

I switched from Nvidia(GTX 660) to AMD (R9 280X) and I am 100% satisfied with the upgrade. I have had problems with both Nvidia and AMD drivers I see them as both equal


----------



## Jetster (Jun 27, 2014)

They are so close nowadays that your question is invalid


----------



## erixx (Jun 27, 2014)

maybe that ^.
A standard user does not really know all about all, but it's a forum! 
Anyway, as I have repeated tons of time, I would rather pay 20 € or $ more and have 5% less performance but a card that works everytime I need it.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jun 27, 2014)

erixx said:


> but a card that works everytime I need it.


so then both brand does it, i never ran into a driver problem or card problem from my 1st nV card or ATI/AMD card until today, except BSOD while i was being a bit too optimistic with OC'ing.
driver tweak with AMD to get it right? never had one, CFX problem? ok some little stuttering but case per case and the issue is going less and less since a while, SLI problems, except a little overheat problem when i ran a GTX580 Matrix never had one (2x3 slots is insane  ) youtube well as erocker wrote: no IE no problems



Exodus said:


> So with a r9 290 I'll be able to max out 100-120fps on most game on 1080p with just a bit of AA? Also will I be fine if i make a crossfire setup or should I go nVIDIA?
> And if I choose to go nVIDIA's side (which I don't think I'll do), which GPU should I get?



100-120fps nope and neither with Nvidia (unless 690/Titan Z/7990/295X2 and then you face SLI/CFX problem as they are dual gpu board but as said CFX/SLI problems tend to get better with time) the thing is once above 30fps you notice more smoothness but your eyes make no difference 50-60fps is good enough (unless you run in med/low settings ofc and then 100fps+ is attainable)

equivalent to the 290 then : on the same perf level (but not price) 780/Titan, higher perf level (and totally not the same price price/perf ratio) 780Ti/Titan Black

PhysX hum ... no game that ask me to install PhysX driver bother me, calculation by CPU and i have a AMD FX 6300 (which is "way" weaker than what you plan to get) so PhysX is not a valid enough argument.
Tesselation nVidia does it a bit better but except for some heavy tesselated benchies no games is a problem with it.


----------



## Sempron Guy (Jun 27, 2014)

Questions like these I usually tell them to get the best their budget permits be it nvidia or amd. If they are dead close in terms of price, then there goes reviews.


----------



## micropage7 (Jun 27, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> Normally Intel/Nvidia is the "more powerful" combo while AMD is the "budget" way to go. Don't get me wrong, AMD does offer some pretty good GPUs and a mid-grade Nvidia can do a pretty good job.
> 
> Nvidia for power.
> AMD for budget.


yea, some people prefer that
but since the difference not much you couldnt feel the difference, except you do ultra setting or benchmarking

i prefer nvidia since its driver feels better than amd. i dont say amd driver is bad but i more comfortable with nvidia.
i may consider amd since they rolled out R series


----------



## ChristTheGreat (Jun 27, 2014)

remixedcat said:


> nVidia has more stable drivers



LOL, you just made my day lol, This is a huge lie, and since a long time.

Oh wait, nVidia had 2 or 3 driver that killed GPU? Or people saying that vista was bad because of the driver support but:






Come on stop being in 2002... the 2 company has good driver, pro and cons, that's it..






Back to topic, just choose the card you like for price/performance, and you won't have any issue.. my last card were HD4870, 5770, 6950, 7950 7970, and no issue at all. alot of friend of mine had nVIdia GPU since the last 3-4 years and all went good. So don't worry, choose the one you like forthe price you want. As long as it has the best performance for your budget...


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Jun 27, 2014)

With a 120Hz display and the games/criteria you mentioned, I would def use the upper end of your max budget. But you DO know if you only wait thru summer you may not see the best Nvidia has to offer in that price range don't you? The high end Maxwell cards are supposed to release by end of this year.

That said, I just saw an EVGA 780 non reference card that's only slightly over your budget on Newegg's Shell Shocker for $475 w/ MIR. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...4130951&cm_re=evga_780-_-14-130-951-_-Product

They also have an MSI 780 that's well within your max budget, but it's clocked lower and not reviewed as well. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127746&cm_re=GTX_780-_-14-127-746-_-Product

If you haven't, sign up for Newegg's email promo deals. They send them out daily and they have a LOT of GPUs on it lately.

On G-Sync, not enough is know about it or AMD's "Free Sync" alternative, other than one seems to require specific brand/model displays carrying the G-Sync chip that cost more, or getting a display with the upcoming DisplayPort 1.3, which should be no additional cost.

It's too soon to tell yet how the quality, price or availability of each will compare.


----------



## Shambles1980 (Jun 27, 2014)

the only reason i have been ati for so long now is because nvidia removed overscan/underscan from the controll pannel so i couldnt make it fit my projector many years ago.
so i gave my 6600 away even paid the postage to send it to some guy in america (he never even said thanx lol) and have been using ati ever since.
If i was to go back to nvidia "which i may do" it would be because of physx and only if it became mainstream (but i think cpu's will have that covered and physx will be redundant soon enough any way)

it really is simply down to which card works best with your system at the most reasonable cost.


----------



## Hilux SSRG (Jun 27, 2014)

Shocked no one has mentioned Matrox gfx cards.




Exodus said:


> So with a r9 290 I'll be able to max out 100-120fps on most game on 1080p with just a bit of AA? Also will I be fine if i make a crossfire setup or should I go nVIDIA?
> And if I choose to go nVIDIA's side (which I don't think I'll do), which GPU should I get?




I think a GeForce GTX 770 is a good candidate with oc headroom; easily comparable to a Radeon R9 290 for about $50-80 less.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Jun 27, 2014)

Shambles1980 said:


> the only reason i have been ati for so long now is because nvidia removed overscan/underscan from the controll pannel...


Both have had scanning adjust-ability for some time.

I'm doubtful that PhysX will ever become truly mainstream, but Nvidia are outdoing AMD on other useful features, like ShadowPlay.

I'm not sure either camp has any compatibility issues with certain hardware. More like just getting you spec balanced as far as CPU, GPU, RAM and PSU.

It's mostly a case of which vendor's product works best with what games. Drivers can be hit and miss on both sides. AMD was coming out with tons of driver updates right after I bought my 7970, and quite often they had betas that really help fix bugs and improve  performance. All they've had for the last year or so though is Crossfire improvements that don't pertain to me. I also get stuttering in lots of games lately, but that is largely due to poorly coded games.

I can't stress enough that 99% of performance issues on PC are due to crap coding, crap porting, or even intentionally dumbed down graphics to make PCs not stand out from consoles, as we've read recently with these Ubi employee testimonials. The state of PC gaming seemed to be getting better with increased game sales, but now it's as if the corporate entities controlling the console industry won't stand for that.





Hilux SSRG said:


> I think a GeForce GTX 770 is a good candidate with oc headroom; easily comparable to a Radeon R9 290 for about $50-80 less.


Compared stock to stock, it takes a 780 to equal a 290, not a 770.


----------



## GhostRyder (Jun 27, 2014)

Look ill just throw my opinion in since it seems thats what this thread is about.

I prefer AMD for graphics and Intel for processors (I intend to switch back to Intel soon) mostly because of the multi GPU performance, the price/value, and the extra ram/support on high resolution setups.  I have Nvidia in my laptop but on my desktop ever since I switched after my pair of 580's I have yet to look back.  Not to say Nvidia is bad, just I do not like the cost mixed with the value you get in this day and age.  A 780ti is faster but lacks VRAM which is bad for lastability and high resolution setups which to me is very important.  

As for your budget, the R9 290 is definitely the best option.  It will serve your purposes the best and offer a lot of performance for the price.

As for drivers, they both work equally well in single, dual, or higher configs and there are very little differences.  Nvidia and AMD both work just as well drivers side and have not caused any problems for me on any game recently minus one or two late CFX profiles (Like watchdogs).


----------



## remixedcat (Jun 27, 2014)

ChristTheGreat said:


> LOL, you just made my day lol, This is a huge lie, and since a long time.
> 
> Oh wait, nVidia had 2 or 3 driver that killed GPU? Or people saying that vista was bad because of the driver support but:
> 
> ...



That's vista. -_-

I've had more problems with that OS then most others. Even wireless networking was really really bad with both Atheros and realtek chips. Upgraded to windows 7 on that laptop and there was no issues with both. 

Vista was a POS OS and basing performance off that is like using shoney's or golden corral as a example of fine dining.


----------



## chinmi (Jun 27, 2014)

erocker said:


> The card has the performance you need within your budget.
> 
> As for reviews, look here: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/


Agree with this. For your budget, the 290 is the best bang for the buck.


----------



## Exodus (Jun 27, 2014)

erocker said:


> Check out the review section that I posted above for the R9 290. The reviews list various games and the performance you get in them.
> 
> The GTX 770 costs the same as a R9 290... but gives you less performance. You don't want that.
> 
> ...



The gtx 770 is like 50$ less than the R9 290 and for the same price I could get the Evga 4gb classified edition or FTW edtion. Those ones:

- http://pcpartpicker.com/part/evga-video-card-04gp43777kr
- http://pcpartpicker.com/part/evga-video-card-04gp43776kr
- http://pcpartpicker.com/part/evga-video-card-04gp43778kr

I've read that high end gtx 770 can get the same performances and sometime even better if overclocked than a r9 290. Is it true?



GreiverBlade said:


> so then both brand does it, i never ran into a driver problem or card problem from my 1st nV card or ATI/AMD card until today, except BSOD while i was being a bit too optimistic with OC'ing.
> driver tweak with AMD to get it right? never had one, CFX problem? ok some little stuttering but case per case and the issue is going less and less since a while, SLI problems, except a little overheat problem when i ran a GTX580 Matrix never had one (2x3 slots is insane  ) youtube well as erocker wrote: no IE no problems
> 
> 100-120fps nope and neither with Nvidia (unless 690/Titan Z/7990/295X2 and then you face SLI/CFX problem as they are dual gpu board but as said CFX/SLI problems tend to get better with time) the thing is once above 30fps you notice more smoothness but your eyes make no difference 50-60fps is good enough (unless you run in med/low settings ofc and then 100fps+ is attainable)
> ...



Wait, you can make physX work on the CPU?  Do you still have good perfs? And if I can't get 100-120 fps on a game, than doesn't a 120hz monitor become kind of pointless? Do you think I should get a IPS/1040p monitor instead?



Sempron Guy said:


> Questions like these I usually tell them to get the best their budget permits be it nvidia or amd. If they are dead close in terms of price, then there goes reviews.



In my case what do you think it would be and why?


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jun 27, 2014)

Frag Maniac said:


> That said, I just saw an EVGA 780 non reference card that's only slightly over your budget on Newegg's Shell Shocker for $475 w/ MIR. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...4130951&cm_re=evga_780-_-14-130-951-_-Product
> 
> They also have an MSI 780 that's well within your max budget, but it's clocked lower and not reviewed as well. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127746&cm_re=GTX_780-_-14-127-746-_-Product
> .


too bad those 2 are still at a higher price than a R9 290  and doesn't beat one.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...4202080R&cm_re=r9_290-_-14-202-080R-_-Product
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131569&cm_re=r9_290-_-14-131-569-_-Product
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814161453&cm_re=r9_290-_-14-161-453-_-Product
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127774&cm_re=r9_290-_-14-127-774-_-Product (only if its a rev.2)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125500&cm_re=r9_290-_-14-125-500-_-Product
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121842&cm_re=r9_290-_-14-121-842-_-Product
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202103&cm_re=r9_290-_-14-202-103-_-Product

but the OP stated he doesn't trust Newegg 



Hilux SSRG said:


> I think a GeForce GTX 770 is a good candidate with oc headroom; easily comparable to a Radeon R9 290 for about $50-80 less.



lol what? a 770 on par with a 290??? i know my 770 AMP! could reach a stock 780 level (which is by incidence the level of a stock 290) but any factory OC custom model of 290 are out of reach of a 770

i had a 770 and now a 290 : day and night, both 2nd hands 250$ for the 770 and 190$ for the 290 (3month of use pristine condition and smooth stable)

for instance i will use Unigine Valley (a more nVidia inclined bench )
ok not so much difference but i use a FX 6300 here and a Xeon E3 1275V2 i wish i still had the Xeon for that test xD but the 290 is a notch above my max OC 770 (yep 50hz more was sadly the max i could get, i had a bad clocker) and is only stock cooler and slight OC

 
but in any games i play the 290 feels smoother than the 770 (except when i still played WoW:MoP but it's known to run better on nV cards.)

13% more in perf for 5% less in perf/price ratio? pretty clear for me (talking stock ofc ... custom model dig a bit more that difference in both aspect)








PS: a 770 is only a "updated" 680



Exodus said:


> Wait, you can make physX work on the CPU?  Do you still have good perfs? And if I can't get 100-120 fps on a game, than doesn't a 120hz monitor become kind of pointless? Do you think I should get a IPS/1040p monitor instead?


well ... if a game ask me to install PhysX driver (IE: Mass Effect3 did) the PhysX is enable and calculated by CPU (you can also choose that option on nV cards in the driver options.)

and why would you run at 100-120fps constant : it is pointless by default unless benching (for max FPS) no a 120hz monitor isn't pointless even if you run at 60fps FPS=/=refresh rate (hz)

last edit for me it's : 270X=>760=>280X=>770=>780=>290=>Titan=>290X=>780Ti=>Titan black=>7990=>690=>Titan Z=>295X2


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Jun 27, 2014)

GreiverBlade said:


> too bad those 2 are still at a higher price than a R9 290  and doesn't beat one.
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...4202080R&cm_re=r9_290-_-14-202-080R-_-Product
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131569&cm_re=r9_290-_-14-131-569-_-Product
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814161453&cm_re=r9_290-_-14-161-453-_-Product
> ...


I was only giving Nvidia examples because it appeared obvious he was leaning that way. Also, of all your examples I'd only trust the MSI, ASUS and Sapphire models you showed, and the 1st two are very close in price and perf to the MSI 780 I listed, and the Sapphire very close in price and perf to the EVGA I listed. The others have very shoddy reviews and aren't much cheaper than the MSI I listed. Hell, don't know if you even noticed but the first one you listed is open box too.

As for his comments on Newegg, don't care, I'm just giving price scenarios, but he is being a bit delusional if he thinks he can work within the budgets he mentioned (with a 120Hz display no less) and get better service and prices elsewhere.


----------



## Shambles1980 (Jun 27, 2014)

i like sapphire for their cooling of cards. usually not to bad designs. usually not very moddable regarding voltage though. and rma is a joke.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jun 27, 2014)

Frag Maniac said:


> Hell, don't know if you even noticed but the first one you listed is open box too.



well if open box means "Demo model" like my usual Retailer does, then it's a new one just been taken out for display and price lowered for obvious reason 
ofc a 780 is similar but usually not cheaper i hope the OP can find some 780 at the price you listed, yet even 1% more for a similar price is worth the shot? isn't it  

also


Exodus said:


> I've read that high end gtx 770 can get the same performances and sometime even better if overclocked than a r9 290. Is it true??


well yes ... but if you can OC a 770 to reach a 780/290 level then you can also OC a 780/290 to reach higher... (then the 50$ difference means nothing)


----------



## v12dock (Jun 28, 2014)

I switched from a 660 to a 280x and it seems smoother. AMD has done a good job with frame pacing issues in their latest drivers.


----------



## Jetster (Jun 28, 2014)

I took advantage of the Bitcoin bubble and sold my 2 X 7950 and bought a GTX780 with the money. Best decision all year


----------



## GhostRyder (Jun 28, 2014)

Exodus said:


> The gtx 770 is like 50$ less than the R9 290 and for the same price I could get the Evga 4gb classified edition or FTW edtion. Those ones:
> 
> - http://pcpartpicker.com/part/evga-video-card-04gp43777kr
> - http://pcpartpicker.com/part/evga-video-card-04gp43776kr
> ...


The GTX 770 is a weaker card, it is a rebranded/overclocked GTX 680 from last generation while the 780 or 290 are the new generation cards with higher performance and overclocking that will render the 770 still weaker in the end.  A GTX 770 is right on par with a 280X in most game the 280X is an HD 7970 from last round.  A R9 290 for 400 would end up being a much better deal than a GTX 770 FTW because you can still overclock it/buy pre overclocked variants that will beat a 770.

Yes PhysX will work on the CPU, I play batman and borderlands with it (Though I do hybrid PhysX now) and it works fine.  Just is not as good without an Nvidia GPU helping out, but PhysX is a dieing breed.

I think you should get an R9 290 in the end.


----------



## Naito (Jun 28, 2014)

GhostRyder said:


> A 780ti is faster but lacks VRAM which is bad for lastability and high resolution setups which to me is very important.



W1zzard's review of a GTX 780 with 6GB of VRAM seems to say otherwise. 6GB barely makes a difference, so it seems 3GB is optimal for the GK110... at least for gaming.


----------



## Exodus (Jun 28, 2014)

Guys don't worry about newegg prices. The site I'm ordering on has a great price match policy. Although they don't match mail in rebate and I would prefer not buying open box or things like that.



Frag Maniac said:


> I was only giving Nvidia examples because it appeared obvious he was leaning that way. Also, of all your examples I'd only trust the MSI, ASUS and Sapphire models you showed, and the 1st two are very close in price and perf to the MSI 780 I listed, and the Sapphire very close in price and perf to the EVGA I listed. The others have very shoddy reviews and aren't much cheaper than the MSI I listed. Hell, don't know if you even noticed but the first one you listed is open box too.
> 
> As for his comments on Newegg, don't care, I'm just giving price scenarios, but he is being a bit delusional if he thinks he can work within the budgets he mentioned (with a 120Hz display no less) and get better service and prices elsewhere.



Why do you think I should get a gtx 780? 
I might be able too cheap of a couple things in my build and add a 20$ to my build but only if its really worth it. As for maxwell, I made a thread recently and people seemed to think that they will have approximatively the same performances.
And I don't think I'll be able to make the summer without a computer since my old one broke. But I'll be buying in around a month and I'm really worried of getting a card so expensive when the next gen is so close. Do you think we will have more info on the next gen then?



GreiverBlade said:


> well if open box means "Demo model" like my usual Retailer does, then it's a new one just been taken out for display and price lowered for obvious reason
> ofc a 780 is similar but usually not cheaper i hope the OP can find some 780 at the price you listed, yet even 1% more for a similar price is worth the shot? isn't it
> 
> also
> ...



What about their stock OC?
Also what do you mean by fps=/=hz? Could explain a little please? 




GhostRyder said:


> The GTX 770 is a weaker card, it is a rebranded/overclocked GTX 680 from last generation while the 780 or 290 are the new generation cards with higher performance and overclocking that will render the 770 still weaker in the end.  A GTX 770 is right on par with a 280X in most game the 280X is an HD 7970 from last round.  A R9 290 for 400 would end up being a much better deal than a GTX 770 FTW because you can still overclock it/buy pre overclocked variants that will beat a 770.
> 
> Yes PhysX will work on the CPU, I play batman and borderlands with it (Though I do hybrid PhysX now) and it works fine.  Just is not as good without an Nvidia GPU helping out, but PhysX is a dieing breed.
> 
> I think you should get an R9 290 in the end.



Aren't the r9 2** rebranded hd 7***? And I'm not really good at OC'ing. In fact I have never tried. Is it hard? Anyways I don't except much comming from me but I can try
If we are only talking about stock speed, who would win between the r9 290 directCU II/triX and the one I listed?



Jetster said:


> I took advantage of the Bitcoin bubble and sold my 2 X 7950 and bought a GTX780 with the money. Best decision all year



So you are recommending me to get the 780? And why was it the best decision you made?


----------



## Jetster (Jun 28, 2014)

Exodus said:


> So you are recommending me to get the 780? And why was it the best decision you made?



Traded two AMD cards for one Nvidia and get the same performance, less power, less heat and newer generation of card. 

There is no difference between AMD and Nivida. Get what is the best deal for the money. I don't know any other way to say it

Brand loyalty is stupid


----------



## HumanSmoke (Jun 28, 2014)

Exodus said:


> If we are only talking about stock speed, who would win between the r9 290 directCU II/triX and the one I listed?


The difference are barely worth mentioning and something you wouldn't be able to see in a real world scenario. I would tend to look at possibly cooling ability and noise factors rather than any infinitesimal difference in framerate, although both designs are fine. I personally lean more towards Sapphire than Asus purely from personal experience with the respective support apparatus of both companies.


Exodus said:


> Aren't the r9 2** rebranded hd 7***?


Not the R9 290, R9 290X, and the dual GPU R9 295X. They are based on a new-ish design Hawaii GPU not seen in the HD 7000 series


Exodus said:


> And I'm not really good at OC'ing. In fact I have never tried. Is it hard?


No it isn't,  although expect to spend some time making sure the overclock is stable. If you haven't tried it before then I'd say put it at the bottom of your "must have" list. Overclocking seldom nets any worthwhile actual real-world gains with the exception of benchmarks where the end product allows people to wail incessantly about one card "destroying" another card because it is 0.5% faster.

If you plan on keeping the card for a while, get the best bang for your buck. At the present time (and talking about new retail pricing) it is the R9 290.
If you plan on upgrading soon and/or frequently then look at a vendor that allows transfer of warranty without hassle. The vast majority of GPUs don't fail within their warranty period, but it doesn't stop prospective secondhand card buyers placing a premium on cards that have an intact warranty. This is a reason that EVGA cards tend to hold value since the warranty is tied to the card (and its serial number) rather than any particular owner.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jun 28, 2014)

Exodus said:


> What about their stock OC?
> Also what do you mean by fps=/=hz? Could explain a little please?


stock OC if a 770 can do it a 780/290 can do it better so again 50$ isn't a valid enough argument + a 4gb 770 would cost more and a 780 has 3gb stock 290 4gb stock

FPS=/=hz simple the monitor refresh rate doesn't have to match the FPS you can get, for matching a 120hz monitor you would need a CFX/SLI setup or a single board dual gpu card. why go for a 60hz monitor than a 120hz if your card can't achieve more than 100ish fps, my 30" 1080P TV is  a 60hz unless i use Vsync i can get higher FPS but the refresh rate of the screen show tearing/stuttering in case of huge FPS variance, as i used SWTOR in a previous thread, i get 55-140fps depending the scene complexity/PJ on screen with Vsync it cap to 55-60fps (drop under 40fps sometime but its due to my CPU) less tearing due to FPS variance yet with a 120hz i would have a 55-120, most of the games in review (also most of the one i play) never go above 60-80fps (except BF3 where i get quite often 105-110) short: in case of a 60hz screen FPS=hz if Vsync on without it FPS=/=hz

i will not enter in the G-sync spot since for me it's a closed over-expensive and non beneficial tech, i would really like to see what freesync has to answer to it (on Displayport 1.3 and once finished) since it's more open ended. (AKA: not able to decide yet since only one tech is available and cost versus utility is a bit "meh" imho)

as you can see (in case of a 1080p) above 110fps its Titan/290X/690/7990/295X2 domain





a little heavier game  and a known Geforce favored example for the second graph (tho the bench is with PhysX off, not that PhysX bring anything in the end)








and some 295X2 ofc at 1500$~ it's out of question. yet still interesting to see


----------



## Exodus (Jun 28, 2014)

HumanSmoke said:


> The difference are barely worth mentioning and something you wouldn't be able to see in a real world scenario. I would tend to look at possibly cooling ability and noise factors rather than any infinitesimal difference in framerate, although both designs are fine. I personally lean more towards Sapphire than Asus purely from personal experience with the respective support apparatus of both companies.



What I meant was which card would be faster when running at stock OC between a high end gtx 770 and a mid end r9 290. For example the gtx 770 classified ,one the card I listed higher, vs a r9 290 Asus or Sapphire.
Although thanks for giving for sharing your toughs on these companies.



HumanSmoke said:


> If you plan on keeping the card for a while, get the best bang for your buck. At the present time (and talking about new retail pricing) it is the R9 290.
> If you plan on upgrading soon and/or frequently then look at a vendor that allows transfer of warranty without hassle. The vast majority of GPUs don't fail within their warranty period, but it doesn't stop prospective secondhand card buyers placing a premium on cards that have an intact warranty. This is a reason that EVGA cards tend to hold value since the warranty is tied to the card (and its serial number) rather than any particular owner.



I haven't thought about that. Thanks for the advice. I change my GPU every 1.5-2 years. What would recommend me? And btw I like your profile pic. 



Jetster said:


> Traded two AMD cards for one Nvidia and get the same performance, less power, less heat and newer generation of card.
> 
> There is no difference between AMD and Nivida. Get what is the best deal for the money. I don't know any other way to say it
> 
> Brand loyalty is stupid



I agree with you. For my needs (check first post if you don't remember), what would recommend me?


----------



## HumanSmoke (Jun 28, 2014)

Exodus said:


> What I meant was which card would be faster when running at stock OC between a high end gtx 770 and a mid end r9 290. For example the gtx 770 classified ,one the card I listed higher, vs a r9 290 Asus or Sapphire.


A GTX 770 would need to be running a sizeable overclock to approach an R9 290. Overclock the 290 and it will leave a GTX 770 in the dust (comparatively).  


Exodus said:


> I haven't thought about that. Thanks for the advice. I change my GPU every 1.5-2 years. What would recommend me?


Probably the R9 290. Two years is approaching the end of the warranty period for a lot of vendors so a transferable warranty wouldn't be that high a priority. 1.5 - 2 years also means at least one architecture change and one refresh, so resell value takes a sizeable hit.
I tend to upgrade every 6 - 8 months, and also upgrade (sidegrade) to better performing cards of the same model as the opportunities present themselves. Selling what is basically current performance/architecture with a sizeable amount of warranty remaining means top dollar resell prices that almost pay for upgrades. To do this you really need to be able to pull the trigger on a new card (or cards) when and where the opportunity arises ( wholesaler overstock, Black Friday specials) and be prepared to sell to a buyer in an area/country where retail prices are very high - usually from a limited distribution infrastructure, and/or high imports tax. 


Exodus said:


> And btw I like your profile pic.


Thanks. I'm a chef who learned his trade in some pretty brutal kitchens - the logo is very apt.


----------



## Jetster (Jun 28, 2014)

EVGA W/ACX cooler SC GTX770 or 780. I haven't used a R9 290 though but I'm happy with my choice


----------



## Exodus (Jun 28, 2014)

Thanks for your help guys. I think I'll follow the advices of the majority and get the R9 290.


----------



## GhostRyder (Jun 28, 2014)

Exodus said:


> Aren't the r9 2** rebranded hd 7***? And I'm not really good at OC'ing. In fact I have never tried. Is it hard? Anyways I don't except much comming from me but I can try
> If we are only talking about stock speed, who would win between the r9 290 directCU II/triX and the one I listed?
> 
> So you are recommending me to get the 780? And why was it the best decision you made?


Basically the R9 290 and 290X are a new GPU and the other below are rebrands similar to Nvidia.  The R9 280X is an HD 7970, the R9 280 is an HD 7950, the R9 270X and 270 are an HD 7870 (The X variant are just higher clocked and overclock better) and so on and so forth.  There are others that are new but they are on the low side.



Exodus said:


> Thanks for your help guys. I think I'll follow the advices of the majority and get the R9 290.


The R9 290 is the best bang for buck card on the market except in the exceptions of used cards on ebay but that's if you want to take that risk.  for a 120hz setup though your probably going to have to drop a few things down a bit to do it as normally you would need a dual GPU setup to get those frames at ultra.

If your picking coolers, the most loved one this round tend to be the Sapphire Vapor X variants seem to cool the best and allow the best overclocks (cooler wise I mean).  I like the MSI gaming editions as they come with great overclocks and I like the sound of the MSI gaming coolers personally (Sounds weird I know but ive heard them running overclocked and you do not hear much to my ears), and the gigabyte ones are always pretty darn good.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jun 28, 2014)

Exodus said:


> high end gtx 770 and a mid end r9 290.?


after two time i see that nonsense... i can't help ... A mid end R9 290 doesn't exist : it's a high end, and there is no low end, mid end, high end for one model of GPU, also even on Stock OC from a custom model, a 290 will allways be above a 770 be it for a small %, and OC isnt that complicated now with the "power limit" you set it to 50% (or less ... ) you push the core/mem to 25-50mhz more you test the stability, rinse and repeat
and since nVidia has launched the 780Ti the 770 seems mid end now for me  (a bit like a 760Ti ultra or a 680 extrem edition) since the high end is occupied by 780/780Ti/Titan/Titan black/Titan Z, comparatively AMD its 290/290X/295X2 (its a 5 model versus 3 model )


Exodus said:


> I haven't thought about that. Thanks for the advice. I change my GPU every 1.5-2 years.


i do kinda same ... (or i should say i GPU jump switch each time i see a magic deal ... ) that's why i took that 290 i have in my sys specs. (tho i don't care about warranty ... i only had one RMA in 24yrs )



Exodus said:


> Thanks for your help guys. I think I'll follow the advices of the majority and get the R9 290.


well i see you made your choice and i can't but agree, i saw a lot recommending the 290, and i approve: best bang for bucks at the time and can last a good while until you need to upgrade (specially with the build you plan to assemble)

also beware with MSI: specifically ask for a Rev.2 model because the Rev.1 had some issue (the Twin Frozr IV cooler is soo effective that the fan sometime didn't spin and the VRM were cooled only by a small alu heatsink and suffered overheat problems, now iirc that heatsink is a bit bigger.)


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Jun 28, 2014)

GreiverBlade said:


> well if open box means "Demo model" like my usual Retailer does, then it's a new one just been taken out for display and price lowered for obvious reason


Open box can cover a range of scenarios and sometimes means lesser warranty. But that was not my point. My point was if you look at OB prices in AMD scenarios, it's only fair to do the same with Nvidia ones. Meaning it's an apples to oranges comparison price wise.

@Exodus,
Actually I first stated you might regret it if you DO get something Nvidia now, vs waiting to see the high end Maxwell performance and pricing. I only gave scenarios in case you insist on getting something before then and happen to prefer Nvidia, as it sounded.

If you DO go with a 290 though, just make sure you get a decent brand. There's been some problems with some of them.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jun 28, 2014)

Frag Maniac said:


> Open box can cover a range of scenarios and sometimes means lesser warranty. But that was not my point. My point was if you look at OB prices in AMD scenarios, it's only fair to do the same with Nvidia ones. Meaning it's an apples to oranges comparison price wise..


not wrong, it's like i could say i have a 3 month demo model (who ran in a shop with a Crysis 3 demo in loop, stock no OC) for 190$ and 21 month warranty left. and compare it to any 190$ nV cards instead of a 780 who is her counterpart ...


but not matter how i look at Newegg for me 780 are all priced in between 290 and 290X (and closer to 290X) except for some deal, ranging from 499$ to 600+ (not only on Newegg ofc) okay refurbished one can be cheaper but not under 400$

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125505&cm_re=290_r9-_-14-125-505-_-Product
Shady deal? (btw i rarely trust customers review on Newegg)


well it's also a land to land case xD where i live the cheapest 780 is 470.60chf and the cheapest 290 is 369chf  for example  (and the cheapest 290X is 473.20 for a BF4 edition ... ok stock cooler )


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 28, 2014)

I prefer AMD because they cooperate better with KVMs.  On the flipside, if you intend to use *NIX, you really have to use NVIDIA because AMD slacks on support.


----------



## el etro (Jun 28, 2014)

Exodus said:


> What I meant by more detail in game was the little sparks and moving sheets of paper that physX adds. Does AMD haves an equivalent? And which card would you recommend me that suit my needs?



 AMD have TressFX, but it don't have all the features Physx haves. I personally don't see Physx as a determinant factor to buy a card, i personally don't care about little extra detail. Buy cards based on performance/price, is better.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Jun 28, 2014)

GreiverBlade said:


> ...but not matter how i look at Newegg for me 780 are all priced in between 290 and 290X (and closer to 290X) except for some deal, ranging from 499$ to 600+ (not only on Newegg ofc) okay refurbished one can be cheaper but not under 400$


But as you said, Newegg isn't the best price examples for him anyway, cuz he don't trust em for some reason.

As far as AMD vs Nvidia in general, it's really hard to predict which will be the better to go with. They both have their pluses and minuses and both seem to be waffling lately. I was really pleased with my $330 purchase on my 7970 for a yr or two, and it came with 3 decent games, but lately there's a lot of top games it doesn't do as well with as I'd like. The problem is, it's sometimes hard to tell whether it's mostly game coding, endorsement favoring, bad drivers, drivers that are written more for newer models than older models, etc. The latter is what I experienced a lot with my last ATI/AMD cards, then they up and relegated them to Legacy support. Nvidia's drivers in the past have always worked longer for older models, and it's looking like more of the same now maybe.

One of the things I'm waiting to find out is if Nvidia will increase the VRAM on high end Maxwells. I'd like to see 4GB.


----------



## Exodus (Jun 29, 2014)

GreiverBlade said:


> after two time i see that nonsense... i can't help ... A mid end R9 290 doesn't exist : it's a high end, and there is no low end, mid end, high end for one model of GPU, also even on Stock OC from a custom model, a 290 will allways be above a 770 be it for a small %, and OC isnt that complicated now with the "power limit" you set it to 50% (or less ... ) you push the core/mem to 25-50mhz more you test the stability, rinse and repeat



I know a ''mid end 290'' doesn't exist. It's a way of talking.   What I wanted to say was a gtx 770 with a high base clock and a excellent cooler and more Vram vs a r9 290 decent stock speed and cooler. But anyways it doesn't matter since you answered my question.
And when overclocking, is there a noticeable difference with the heat/noise or with the power consumption? I'm kinda worried on this point.



Frag Maniac said:


> But as you said, Newegg isn't the best price examples for him anyway, cuz he don't trust em for some reason.
> 
> As far as AMD vs Nvidia in general, it's really hard to predict which will be the better to go with. They both have their pluses and minuses and both seem to be waffling lately. I was really pleased with my $330 purchase on my 7970 for a yr or two, and it came with 3 decent games, but lately there's a lot of top games it doesn't do as well with as I'd like. The problem is, it's sometimes hard to tell whether it's mostly game coding, endorsement favoring, bad drivers, drivers that are written more for newer models than older models, etc. The latter is what I experienced a lot with my last ATI/AMD cards, then they up and relegated them to Legacy support. Nvidia's drivers in the past have always worked longer for older models, and it's looking like more of the same now maybe.
> 
> One of the things I'm waiting to find out is if Nvidia will increase the VRAM on high end Maxwells. I'd like to see 4GB.



Newegg is fine since I can equalize their prices with a price policy.

And do you think we will get some news about Maxwell before the end of this summer? I'll try to see if I can wait a bit more. But from what I've read on another thread, people seem to think that be a big difference.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Jun 29, 2014)

Exodus said:


> And do you think we will get some news about Maxwell before the end of this summer? I'll try to see if I can wait a bit more. But from what I've read on another thread, people seem to think that be a big difference.


Impossible to say since anything but an Nvidia announcement is speculation usually, and they don't reveal anything until just before launch.


----------



## Mussels (Jun 29, 2014)

as someone with systems on all sides of every fence:


Screw going by brand. dont even think like that. go by model.

is nvidia better than AMD? well a titan beats a 5830 i guess, but my 7970 rapes my 550ti.

each generation, some cards stand out as being great value for money, or great performance per watt - use THOSE criteria to choose a card, based on whats out at the time of purchase.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jun 29, 2014)

Frag Maniac said:


> But as you said, Newegg isn't the best price examples.


yep... yet the cheaper 780 is 100chf more than the cheaper 290 where i am, and even worse it's on level of the cheapest 290X, we can find 2nd hand with sometime near fulll warranty 290 for 250chf and less whereas 780 are most of the time just 5% cheaper than retail, or even higher price because the seller take buyers for fools (and sometime it works xD)
and i see the same ratio on nearly all etailer  listing i see "around the world" (with some good and surprising exceptions)



Frag Maniac said:


> The problem is, it's sometimes hard to tell whether it's mostly game coding, endorsement favoring, bad drivers, drivers that are written more for newer models than older models, etc. The latter is what I experienced a lot with my last ATI/AMD cards, then they up and relegated them to Legacy support. Nvidia's drivers in the past have always worked longer for older models, and it's looking like more of the same now maybe.


well the bigger model are supported long enough, although my 3650 or 4870 aren't supported anymore my LP 5450 and R7-240(wait wrong example  ) (and help a lot in a SSF old bag for movies  )

on game coding i agree, the 580's i had (4 in total 1 ref zotac 2 matrix asus 1 ref evga) did better in 1 game for me but it was a known "to run better with nVidia" mmo 




Frag Maniac said:


> One of the things I'm waiting to find out is if Nvidia will increase the VRAM on high end Maxwells. I'd like to see 4GB.


agreed, i took a 290 because of that and also because 4gb and more, models from nV are out of budget, tho this year Maxwells will be the "smalls" one the big one is for 2015 if the news are correct.



Exodus said:


> And when overclocking, is there a noticeable difference with the heat/noise or with the power consumption? I'm kinda worried on this point.


heat/noise mostly but with custom cooler it's a minor problem, power consumption well it goes along but it's also minor, regular user don't need to worry about OC in the end a good factory OC with custom design would suffice for any actual and upcoming game (in case of a 780/290 and above) specially for 1080P and still enough for 1440/1600P.



Mussels said:


> each generation, some cards stand out as being great value for money, or great performance per watt - use THOSE criteria to choose a card, based on whats out at the time of purchase.


^this, 8800GT,4650,260,7950 where good example and now the 290


----------



## mroofie (Jun 29, 2014)

how about some add the cool features that come with NVIDIA gtx cards and no its not just physx

Im on the verge on buying a card and im looking at amd and nvidia and gtx cards cost more but i get more than what amd is offering.

too many fanboy's here

amd budget gaming but at a cost !
nvidia gaming % slower costs more but comes with major gaming features!


----------



## Vario (Jun 29, 2014)

If you want Nvidia get a 770 or get a 780.  PNY's 770 XLR8 OC 2GB is fine for me at 1080P but if you want 1440P or to be able to run Ultra for a few more years it wouldn't be enough.  As games inevitably become more detailed, I'll be content with "High" settings for a few years.

I sold my 7970 at the height of the litecoin bubble and bought the 770 to replace it.  The performance is very similar but I have less problems, the 7970 wasn't stable due to it being preowned.  The PNY XLR8 OC 770 I have is one of the more powerful pre-overclocked 770/680 cards with a 1254 core clock (boost) and an 1800 memory clock.

If you want 290 level of performance but Nvidia you'd need to spend the extra for a 780.
With Nvidia you get Phys-X, ShadowPlay (captures gaming video for you with minimal added latency) and Geforce Experience which presets and hopefully optimizes your game's graphics to match what your machine can run.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jun 29, 2014)

mroofie said:


> how about some add the cool features that come with NVIDIA gtx cards and no its not just physx
> 
> Im on the verge on buying a card and im looking at amd and nvidia and gtx cards cost more but i get more than what amd is offering.
> 
> ...


talk about fanboy talk, what are those features that AMD lacks? and what they offer more for the cost added? Shadowplay? that's one indeed but is it decisive?

also AMD is budget gaming but at a cost? which one? power consumption? (marginal)
i had a a 460, 5850, 560, 6950, 580x4, 270, 270X, and now a 290 and the last one is by far the best bang for bucks i had, i have a close friend who has a similar setup as mine but his GFX is a 780 his rig cost quite a bit more than mine due to that and except in some particular case ie: wow, watch dogs, other "nVidia inclined" games (which are quite a few in fact) his system is marginally slower (not a huge gap ofc) for me the price difference between a 290 and a 780 is not justified by Shadowplay or Gsync (which ridiculously add more money to spend to get it to the initial buy).

ok GeForce Experience autotune... well AMD did not the right thing with Raptr (the app can set up the settings according to your configuration just same as Experience, with some hiccup ofc) i use neither of them ... no need for them


----------



## Vario (Jun 29, 2014)

Nothing wrong with having a brand preference, its just going to cost mroofie some extra cash to go to a 780 instead of a 290.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jun 29, 2014)

Vario said:


> Nothing wrong with having a brand preference, its just going to cost mroofie some extra cash to go to a 780 instead of a 290.


true that... i had both brand and i had good experience with both brand.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Jun 29, 2014)

GreiverBlade said:


> ...what they offer more for the cost added? Shadowplay? that's one indeed but is it decisive?


Well for those with GCN AMDs (7000 series and beyond), AMD DOES have Raptr's Game DVR now. It's just in the beta stage so far and only does 10 minute replay saving, but it's very similar in features and performance to ShadowPlay.

Anyone with a GCN AMD card that want's something like ShadowPlay needs to get on Raptr's Game DVR feedback forum and let them know just what features you want (including longer replay saving), and what it works well at and not so well at.


----------



## GhostRyder (Jun 29, 2014)

mroofie said:


> how about some add the cool features that come with NVIDIA gtx cards and no its not just physx
> 
> Im on the verge on buying a card and im looking at amd and nvidia and gtx cards cost more but i get more than what amd is offering.
> 
> ...


No it does not?

Nvidia has PhysX, AMD has tressFX thought PhysX got a little more adoption is on the dieing path while TressFX got one major game I can think of.
Shadow Play now has Raptr Game DVR to compete with
AMD gives you 3 games from a pretty big list to choose from Nvidia gives you Watchdogs and in some brands give a few others in some cases.
AMD gives you Mantle, Nvidia gives you Gameworks

It could go back and fourth like that forever but does not make either a better value in the end.  All that matters is the performance at the price you want to spend, neither have an edge in everything and it comes down to whatever price you want to pay and the performance your expecting for that price.  Features and sets of add on's rarely make anything more enticing than the other in this day and age and should not be really used to justify buying a GPU because either side will most likely have something comparable in the end.

You should buy the card that fits your budget and your needs, nothing more, nothing less.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jul 1, 2014)

Frag Maniac said:


> Well for those with GCN AMDs (7000 series and beyond), AMD DOES have Raptr's Game DVR now. It's just in the beta stage so far and only does 10 minute replay saving, but it's very similar in features and performance to ShadowPlay.
> 
> Anyone with a GCN AMD card that want's something like ShadowPlay needs to get on Raptr's Game DVR feedback forum and let them know just what features you want (including longer replay saving), and what it works well at and not so well at.


i was about to post this:

"






If you've already heard about the Game DVR beta, apologies in advance -- but we're kind of excited about this and want to make sure everybody knows. We've added the most requested feature to AMD Gaming Evolved: continuous gameplay recording so you never miss a highlight, as well as manual start/stop recording!

Our gameplay capture takes advantage of hardware-accelerated encoding via AMD's Video Codec Engine (VCE), which means you'll see virtually no performance impact while recording. Based on independent benchmarking performed by AnandTech.com, the difference in frames-per-second with Game DVR on versus off was "consistently less than 3%."

Our redesigned client UI makes it super easy to set up, too. From the Home tab in the client Control Center, simply click Record to turn on Game DVR. With our Replay capability, we automatically capture your last 15 seconds of gameplay time (by default -- you can bump that all the way up to 10 minutes), then save a clip when you hit Ctrl + /. And with Record, use Ctrl + ; to start and stop gameplay capture at any time. You can then use the Gallery to upload clips directly to YouTube."



GhostRyder said:


> You should buy the card that fits your budget and your needs, nothing more, nothing less.


^this except the fact that if you have the budget for a 780 don't go 780 but 290 for cheaper and same perf or 290X for around the same price and more perf.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jul 1, 2014)

Games today need a minimum of 3 Titans Blacks in SLI. Anything less honestly you will take a massive performance hit when you game at the resolution you want to game at on any PC. Even with 3 you are not really future proof. Console game developers "code to the metal" now so the massive overhead a PC creates you will need a LOT more GPU power to compensate than in the past. You can water cool cheaper GPU's but the over all you need Titan Blacks and 16 gigs of RAM to maintain a decent frame rate due to the next gen specs.

PC gaming isn't for noobs. There is a lot of misinformation out there. I suggest you read some reviews.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jul 1, 2014)

Hilux SSRG said:


> Shocked no one has mentioned Matrox gfx cards.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



GTX770 like the 680, scale pretty terribly when overclocked. That was one of the main downsides of the 680 compared to the 7970.



TheMailMan78 said:


> Games today need a minimum of 3 Titans Blacks in SLI. Anything less honestly you will take a massive performance hit when you game at the resolution you want to game at on any PC. Even with 3 you are not really future proof. Console game developers "code to the metal" now so the massive overhead a PC creates you will need a LOT more GPU power to compensate than in the past. You can water cool cheaper GPU's but the over all you need Titan Blacks and 16 gigs of RAM to maintain a decent frame rate due to the next gen specs.
> 
> PC gaming isn't for noobs. There is a lot of misinformation out there. I suggest you read some reviews.



And there you have it everyone, the art of trolling.......


----------



## Hilux SSRG (Jul 1, 2014)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> GTX770 like the 680, scale pretty terribly when overclocked. That was one of the main downsides of the 680 compared to the 7970.



The 680/770 scaled well in oc with about a 20% less power draw compared to 7970, I think you may be wrong there.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jul 1, 2014)

Hilux SSRG said:


> The 680/770 scaled well in oc with about a 20% less power draw compared to 7970, I think you may be wrong there.



Dude, I owned a 680, also had it on watercooling. First hand experience I can say that overclocking it did not yield all that much in performance like 5-7fps max (less depending on the game) with a 100mhz+ increase in clock. The 680/770s have less throughput then the 7970s. I upgraded to a 780, and overclocking the 780 has scaled a lot better when overclocked.

From TPU 680 Review:









> Here we see 2.9% real life performance gained. Also note the increased amount of upward spikes in Shogun 2, BF3 and Dragon Age 2, which are caused by games that love to run higher clocks, yet are not blocked by the power limiter from doing so.


----------



## Hilux SSRG (Jul 1, 2014)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> Dude, I owned a 680, also had it on watercooling. First hand experience I can say that overclocking it did not yield all that much in performance like 5-7fps max (less depending on the game) with a 100mhz+ increase in clock. The 680/770s have less throughput then the 7970s. I upgraded to a 780, and overclocking the 780 has scaled a lot better when overclocked.



Your particular 680 card may have not gotten a large enough performance increase but that is not the case for many people who were able to get 10-15-20% oc increases from the 680s/770s.  At a lower power draw than 7970.  Both cards are/were great at oc.  The 780s are a different beast altogether and not comparable to 680s/7970s.

I hope you did get more than just a +100mhz bump on that 680?


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jul 1, 2014)

Hilux SSRG said:


> Your particular 680 card may have not gotten a large enough performance increase but that is not the case for many people who were able to get 10-15-20% oc increases from the 680s/770s.  At a lower power draw than 7970.  Both cards are/were great at oc.  The 780s are a different beast altogether and not comparable to 680s/7970s.
> 
> I hope you did get more than just a +100mhz bump on that 680?



I am going by what the talk was when I had the 680, and the trend was that if the 680 and 7970 are overclocked the the same percentage, the 7970 would edge the 680 out. I do not remember my exact clocks on my 680, but I think I maxed at like ~1250mhz.


----------



## Vario (Jul 1, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Games today need a minimum of 3 Titans Blacks in SLI. Anything less honestly you will take a massive performance hit when you game at the resolution you want to game at on any PC. Even with 3 you are not really future proof. Console game developers "code to the metal" now so the massive overhead a PC creates you will need a LOT more GPU power to compensate than in the past. You can water cool cheaper GPU's but the over all you need Titan Blacks and 16 gigs of RAM to maintain a decent frame rate due to the next gen specs.
> 
> PC gaming isn't for noobs. There is a lot of misinformation out there. I suggest you read some reviews.


Will a Razer Naga bottleneck a Titan Black?


----------



## erocker (Jul 1, 2014)

Generally most tech enthusiast forums don't condone these XXX vs. XXX threads. Well... we now have 4 pages to mull over. Good enough!


----------

