Contradicting R9 390 benchmark results

[Mandathor]

The R9 390 is tempting but the benchmark results have me worried.

I see here that it does no better than a GTX 970:
http://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/1984-amd-r9-390-380-benchmark-review/Page-2

But on forbes it shows significant performance boost compared to gtx 970:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2015/06/18/amd-radeon-390x-video-card-edges-out-nvidia-gtx-980-in-4k-gaming/

I have very little tech knowledge. Does anyone know why I can find reports where R9 390 easily beats GTX 970, and others that show less or no performance increase.
Id rather go for a used GTX 970 if the performance difference is low. The old R9 290 is too noisy for me to consider. But I'm also looking to get a 21:9 freesync screen in the future so thats another point to buy the R9 390.

 

[Gam3r01]

At 1080p the 970 is a better card, however as you increase the resolution that begins to change.
At 1440p and above the 390 performs better than the 970, even passing the 290X in certain situations.

Due to your interest in higher resolution, the 970 may not be your best option.

 

[Mandathor]

That explains it. Yeah, I'm 80% sure I will get a 3440x1440 freesync screen. Considering that the 390 then seems a better option. Now I only have to make the choice of brand: gigabyte, msi or saphire. Will have to look for the reviews... thank you

 

[Gam3r01]

I personally recommend sapphire. They are the name to beat in terms of AMD cards.
Great quality, performance, and cooling.

 

[Mandathor]

I have a follow up question. If my system has a R9 390 would i5-4440 3.1GHz and 8 gb of ram "bottleneck" the graphics card? I could easily upgrade the memory to 16 gb.

 

[ccampy]

8gb of ram won't bottleneck even 4k gaming

 

[Gam3r01]

The ram and graphics card are generally unrelated.
8GB should be enough for the system, in the situation where it wouldnt be enough (for some reason) adding in 8 more gigs would be easy.