EVGA SSC GTX 970 ($240) vs Reference R9 290x ($205)

[agentbob]

Like the title says, I have to make a decision between those 2 cards. The 970 I have an eye on is a EVGA SSC with a cooling back-plate for $240 and the 290x is a reference card for $205. These are both used cards so that into account. I'm kind of hesitant to buy the 290x reference because I have a 7950 reference that started having massive overheating problems after only 2.5 years, but the 290x being $35 cheaper with similar performance to the 970 is really luring me in. Would the extra $35 be worth it for long-term stability in your opinion? Also is there a big difference in performance between a factory overclocked 970 vs a reference 290x, I couldn't find any benchmarks comparing those specific scenarios. Thanks to whoever responds.

 

[jaslion]

Like the title says, I have to make a decision between those 2 cards. The 970 I have an eye on is a EVGA SSC with a cooling back-plate for $240 and the 290x is a reference card for $205. These are both used cards so that into account. I'm kind of hesitant to buy the 290x reference because I have a 7950 reference that started having massive overheating problems after only 2.5 years, but the 290x being $35 cheaper with similar performance to the 970 is really luring me in. Would the extra $35 be worth it for long-term stability in your opinion? Also is there a big difference in performance between a factory overclocked 970 vs a reference 290x, I couldn't find any benchmarks comparing those specific scenarios. Thanks to whoever responds.

The thermal paste probably dried up on your 7950 so a quick replacement should fix that (also new thermal pads for the memory).

You can have a 1060 3gb for 229$ which is a tiny bit better than the 970.

The r9 290x will outperform both but runs A LOT hotter and LOUDER due to the reference cooler.
Also with getting a new card you have warranty and in case of the 970 you won't have the slow 512mb of vram which really slows the card down when used.

 

[agentbob]

Like the title says, I have to make a decision between those 2 cards. The 970 I have an eye on is a EVGA SSC with a cooling back-plate for $240 and the 290x is a reference card for $205. These are both used cards so that into account. I'm kind of hesitant to buy the 290x reference because I have a 7950 reference that started having massive overheating problems after only 2.5 years, but the 290x being $35 cheaper with similar performance to the 970 is really luring me in. Would the extra $35 be worth it for long-term stability in your opinion? Also is there a big difference in performance between a factory overclocked 970 vs a reference 290x, I couldn't find any benchmarks comparing those specific scenarios. Thanks to whoever responds.

The thermal paste probably dried up on your 7950 so a quick replacement should fix that (also new thermal pads for the memory).

You can have a 1060 3gb for 229$ which is a tiny bit better than the 970.


The r9 290x will outperform both but runs A LOT hotter and LOUDER due to the reference cooler.
Also with getting a new card you have warranty and in case of the 970 you won't have the slow 512mb of vram which really slows the card down when used.

Thanks for the reply. I forgot to mention I live in Canada so it's pretty much impossible to find a 1060 under $250, even used/mined. The cards I found were the best prices in my respective area. Is the performance gap between the 970 and 290x really big? I'm starting to lean towards the 970 after finding out how much power the 290x actually uses (almost $100 extra per year), but a big performance difference could justify the cost. If not I think the 970 would be the better choice value wise.

 

[Th_Redman]

I'm in Nova Scotia and if you can get the 970 , I really recommend it, even a bit of a higher cost. There isn't much difference gaming wise, especially at 1080p resolution and the 970 is much cooler(I believe 160 watts vs 250+ watts for the R9 290x). Also, there is less chance of the 970 being used for mining as Radeon cards have much better hash rates for mining.

 

[agentbob]

I'm in Nova Scotia and if you can get the 970 , I really recommend it, even a bit of a higher cost. There isn't much difference gaming wise, especially at 1080p resolution and the 970 is much cooler(I believe 160 watts vs 250+ watts for the R9 290x). Also, there is less chance of the 970 being used for mining as Radeon cards have much better hash rates for mining.

The thing is the higher cost is immediately going to be offset because of how efficient the 970 is. I think the 970 in the long term is a much better value, most likely going to get that now. Thanks for your response.

 

[jaslion]

Like the title says, I have to make a decision between those 2 cards. The 970 I have an eye on is a EVGA SSC with a cooling back-plate for $240 and the 290x is a reference card for $205. These are both used cards so that into account. I'm kind of hesitant to buy the 290x reference because I have a 7950 reference that started having massive overheating problems after only 2.5 years, but the 290x being $35 cheaper with similar performance to the 970 is really luring me in. Would the extra $35 be worth it for long-term stability in your opinion? Also is there a big difference in performance between a factory overclocked 970 vs a reference 290x, I couldn't find any benchmarks comparing those specific scenarios. Thanks to whoever responds.

The thermal paste probably dried up on your 7950 so a quick replacement should fix that (also new thermal pads for the memory).

You can have a 1060 3gb for 229$ which is a tiny bit better than the 970.


The r9 290x will outperform both but runs A LOT hotter and LOUDER due to the reference cooler.
Also with getting a new card you have warranty and in case of the 970 you won't have the slow 512mb of vram which really slows the card down when used.

Thanks for the reply. I forgot to mention I live in Canada so it's pretty much impossible to find a 1060 under $250, even used/mined. The cards I found were the best prices in my respective area. Is the performance gap between the 970 and 290x really big? I'm starting to lean towards the 970 after finding out how much power the 290x actually uses (almost $100 extra per year), but a big performance difference could justify the cost. If not I think the 970 would be the better choice value wise.

Then go for the 970. The power consumption is a really big drawback of the 290x even if it's about 10% better.