evga gtx 780 acx vs r9 290 vapor-x

Which would you buy?

  • EVGA GeForce GTX 780 3GB Superclocked ACX

    Votes: 4 44.4%
  • Sapphire Radeon R9 290 4GB Vapor-X

    Votes: 5 55.6%

  • Total voters
    9
Get the 780, it performs better than the 290 and you get all the extra goodies from NVIDIA, Shodowplay ect. IMO having being a previous AMD 7970 owner I was not impressed, NVIDIA has better driver support and uses better hardware.
 
Plus the Nvidia experience is just better. Games run better and smoother. It's not all about raw fps count, there are lots of other performance factors. I was an AMD guy for years and years, and I finally decided to try out a Nvidia card. The overall experience is just much better.

That being said, AMD is most likely a better value. It all depends on what your preferences are really.
 
Question was about r9 290 not 290x.

I found no direct comparison but few indirect throug comparing few different tests/review.
By those tests 780 acx should perform +- as GTX Titan or little lower. While r9 290 vapor-x should outperform GTX Titan about 5% +-. So not so big difference. Both are good and powerful cards.
 


Problem is those are reference models so both of those cards have lower performance than vapor-x or superclocked acx versions. But yeah r9 290 is more powerful generally. But difference is not so big. Also some game may perform better on one some on other it depends on how is that game tuned towards amd/nvidia.

I personally plan to buy r9 290 vapor-x or maybe 290x version if it come finally out.
 


I just ordered my R9 290 Vapor-X . It is available. Runs around $450. The R9 290x Vapor-X is available also.
 
the 290 and 780 are very close in terms of performance to the point that anyone would be hard pressed to tell the performance difference, except obviously in mantle acceleration on the 290. that said, if you need a certain feature like opencl opengl mantel or cuda physx…. get the card that suits your need. if its just purely for gaming, get whichever one is cheaper. currently the 290s are priced very aggressively and i believe them to be the better buy when there is a $40-70 price difference…. unless you want a certain game/games that come with a card. nvidia cards now come with Watch Dogs while amd allows you to choose from 3 already released but popular games.
 
So as far as performance goes, the 290 should slightly outperforms the 780? And performance aside, what about things like heat and/or power consumption? If this is a card I want to last me a while I feel like those are things i might want to take into account.
 
Nvidia cards have significantly lower power consumption and heat generation. The AMD cards are designed to run hotter though, so that doesn't necessarily mean they won't last as long.
 
Temperature should be +- same between 60-70 in full load for both.
Noise I think both are pretty quiet with ACX being i think slightly quieter. I can't find direct comparison and it's even worse because each review use different setting (distance, closed/open case or even open bench) so hard to compare indirectly thing like noise level. But acx in this case should be little better, but both cards are lot quiter than reference models or some other versions.

EDIT: Ultimately guess either choose based on sympathy if you got affinity toward one of those brands or by price. Both are good cards and should perform well.
 


power consuntion is not a big factor they consume almost the same so dont use fanboy argument for you to get back your money you have to run this card for years so dont say that
 


Jeez what's with your attitude? I stated facts, nothing was biased.

Don't say what? Do you get defensive with everyone that doesn't share your opinion?
 




im not criticizing your opinion about liking nvidia over amd im here cuz he as something and you said the R9 290 comsume way more energy and is not true here is the truth:
http://www.hwcompare.com/16200/geforce-gtx-780-vs-radeon-r9-290/

the difference is just 50 watts almost none so your argument is wrong

300 watts vs 250 watts
 
So as I see it right now, they are pretty much equal. At the moment, the r9 is cheaper, however I like the nvidia features such as geforce experience. Now let's say I wait it out for the 800 series release. Would the 800 equivalent gtx be better? With there be a significant price drop on 700 series cards?
 


Maxwell is WAYY more efficient
 
There is no solid information on the 8xx cards yet, so to say it is going to be way better, there is no information to back that up. I am not saying they won't be great cards but you can't know for sure. If you are going to wait, last I read they have been delayed until Q1 - Q2 of 2015. There is always going to be some great new thing around the corner. I say just get what you want and enjoy it. I still think the gtx 780 is a better choice, but as stated before they are both very powerful and it is going to be hard to notice much different between them when gaming.
 
R9 290's will be future proof as they sport a larger memory bus and more Vram. So if you decide "Oh, I feel like having a larger resolution monitor" or similar situation then the R9 290's would be more suitable. Since they both have the same performance essentially, might as well go with the R9's because they have superior memory specifications if you encounter such a scenario. Also nvidia generally overprice the cards by default.
 


you think that if I (or anyone else) decided to try 8k (and even that probably wont use 4GB or 3) I won't need a better card instead of just more vram? Bottom line, vram isn't the bottleneck, the card is.
 



If you were to crossfire or sli(for the power aspect) then 8K will use up that vram, and 4k will push it. On some intensive sessions on 5760x1080p I use up to 3Gb of vram and that is less pixels than 4K. So 8k will eat it all up, if you were to crossfire or sli, then memory handling will become the bottleneck. As future titles come out that stress vRam more, then Vram bottlenecks will become apparent even on 4k. Thats why on high Res sessions the R9 pulls ahead exclusively.

But you are missing the point, if both cards perform the same, might as well get the card with better memory specifications even if you wont use it to its limit. value for money. Also AMD is not healthy as it used to be, they have bought out an on par product and supporting them will benefit everybody. I am not a fanboy as I have a nvidia GPU in my laptop.

A lot can happen in a few years.
 
from personally experience, crossfire is better than sli on multi-monitor gaming. r9 290 reference version with nice water cooler is going to be the most powerful setup on budget