R9 280X vs GTX 770

[jty0yt]

I know there are threads of this already but I want a fresh opinion. I have two options, the ASUS R9 280X 3GB and a ASUS GTX 770 both with DirectCUII cooling.

What one do you recommend and why? I know the 770 has a higher clock but the 280x has mantle..?

Confused 😛

 

[MeteorsRaining]

I'd go with 280X for the fact that it has more VRAM and will help in heavily textured games.

 

[Denis Stoikovski]

Lol why their prices are so close? Go with the 770 but if the 4gb version is in your range of budget get it!

 

[jty0yt]

I'd go with 280X for the fact that it has more VRAM and will help in heavily textured games.

Like?

 

[jty0yt]

Lol why their prices are so close? Go with the 770 but if the 4gb version is in your range of budget get it!

I asked for a reason

 

[RevolutionHD]

The 280X gives you a better gaming experience than the 770 in all games that are optimized for AMD, for example: Battlefield 4. It costs less money, has more RAM and is just better. The price of the 4GB version of the 770 is so high that u can almost get an R9 290 with it so it would not be a good option.

I prefer the 280X over the GTX-770. Go for it

 

[jty0yt]

The 280X gives you a better gaming experience than the 770 in all games that are optimized for AMD, for example: Battlefield 4. It costs less money, has more RAM and is just better. The price of the 4GB version of the 770 is so high that u can almost get an R9 290 with it so it would not be a good option.

I prefer the 280X over the GTX-770. Go for it

Ty for the deatiled answer

 

[MeteorsRaining]

The 770 4GB is a no brainer, there just won't be any difference on FHD or 2k. Maybe a FPS or 2 with high AA, but the prices of 770 4GB are usually close to 290s so we'd go out of context.

280X has the perfect VRAM size: 3GB, it can handle games like heavily modded Skyrim with ease thanks to more VRAM, 770 is just not good enough to utilize the 4GB if its provided to it. 280X is also cheaper so its a better overall card if you don't care for the extra power it takes.

Both will be comfortable on ultra and if you want to record your gameplay, 770 is a viable option with its ShadowPlay, but other than that (and more energy efficiency), I don't see much in 770's extra 10 bucks tag.

 

[geofelt]

Both cards are in the same performance tier. Depending on the game, the differences are detectable only by a synthetic benchmark, not by actual gameplay.

Graphics card designers select the appropriate balance of specs such as shaders, clocks, vram, etc to meet a certain price/performance point.

You will get fair value at every price point. Don't stew over the decision.

Mantle allows the graphics driver to execute with less cpu overhead. It is of minor benefit when using a strong cpu like you probably have if you are considering these cards.

Vram is of value if your game needs it. Skyrim mods are notorious for consuming vram.
Past that, it is probably better to spend your vram dollars on a faster card in the first place.
Read this:
http://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Video-Card-Performance-2GB-vs-4GB-Memory-154/

As a rule, the R9 cards run hotter and take more power than their Nvidia equivalents. They get their performance by being factory overclocked. That is why they will come with fancy coolers.

Do not plan on much fro overclocking. Vendors are wise to overclocking and bin their chips. The best ones go into factory superclocked versions to be sold at a higher price. I think you gat fair value for the extra paid.

My sense is that most prefer the nvidia drivers.

I have a method to pick between equally performing products.
Go to newegg and find the candidates.
Filter on the most reviews by verified buyers.
Then look at what percent of the reviews have one or two eggs indicating some sort of a problem.
In particular, look at the reasons for a bad review. Some are not very valid, so exclude those.

For the R9-280X you get 35% unfavorable.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121803
For the GTX770, you get 16% unfavorable
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121770

I might prefer this evga version:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130921

 

[Denis Stoikovski]

The 280X gives you a better gaming experience than the 770 in all games that are optimized for AMD, for example: Battlefield 4. It costs less money, has more RAM and is just better. The price of the 4GB version of the 770 is so high that u can almost get an R9 290 with it so it would not be a good option.

I prefer the 280X over the GTX-770. Go for it

Dude rly? Can't you see that the difference here is 10$? Or whatever is that valut

 

[jty0yt]

Both cards are in the same performance tier. Depending on the game, the differences are detectable only by a synthetic benchmark, not by actual gameplay.

Graphics card designers select the appropriate balance of specs such as shaders, clocks, vram, etc to meet a certain price/performance point.

You will get fair value at every price point. Don't stew over the decision.

Mantle allows the graphics driver to execute with less cpu overhead. It is of minor benefit when using a strong cpu like you probably have if you are considering these cards.

Vram is of value if your game needs it. Skyrim mods are notorious for consuming vram.
Past that, it is probably better to spend your vram dollars on a faster card in the first place.
Read this:
http://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Video-Card-Performance-2GB-vs-4GB-Memory-154/

As a rule, the R9 cards run hotter and take more power than their Nvidia equivalents. They get their performance by being factory overclocked. That is why they will come with fancy coolers.

Do not plan on much fro overclocking. Vendors are wise to overclocking and bin their chips. The best ones go into factory superclocked versions to be sold at a higher price. I think you gat fair value for the extra paid.

My sense is that most prefer the nvidia drivers.

I have a method to pick between equally performing products.
Go to newegg and find the candidates.
Filter on the most reviews by verified buyers.
Then look at what percent of the reviews have one or two eggs indicating some sort of a problem.
In particular, look at the reasons for a bad review. Some are not very valid, so exclude those.

For the R9-280X you get 35% unfavorable.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121803
For the GTX770, you get 16% unfavorable
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121770

I might prefer this evga version:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130921

Going to be using the i5 4690k and OC it a bit with a Noctua DH-15. Also thanks for the answer

 

[jty0yt]

The 280X gives you a better gaming experience than the 770 in all games that are optimized for AMD, for example: Battlefield 4. It costs less money, has more RAM and is just better. The price of the 4GB version of the 770 is so high that u can almost get an R9 290 with it so it would not be a good option.

I prefer the 280X over the GTX-770. Go for it

Dude rly? Can't you see that the difference here is 10$? Or whatever is that valut

It is 10 euro difference for the 2gb 70 not a 4gb.

 

[MeteorsRaining]

If you want to OC a bit, then get nothing higher than CM Hyper EVO 212, or D14 at max if you care about noise too much. D15 is of no use over D14 as it only has more memory clearance and better width, but is really a pretty penny, would give you a couple better C than D14, which won't matter on moderate OCing.

 

[jty0yt]

On newegg alot of people are saying the r9 280x is artifacting like crazy??

 

[jty0yt]

If you want to OC a bit, then get nothing higher than CM Hyper EVO 212, or D14 at max if you care about noise too much. D15 is of no use over D14 as it only has more memory clearance and better width, but is really a pretty penny, would give you a couple better C than D14, which won't matter on moderate OCing.

Well i plan to OC to 4/4.2 would a hyper 212 EVO be ok even then? And it would be nice to save some money

 

[MeteorsRaining]

The R9 280X is just an overclocked version of the 7970 so it is bound to be a bit unstable. And that particular version does artifact a lot.

 

[Undying89]

The R9 280X is just an overclocked version of the 7970 so it is bound to be a bit unstable. And that particular version does artifact a lot.

And what is GTX770? Overclocked version of GTX680. Get your facts straight.

 

[Mac266]

The R9 280X is just an overclocked version of the 7970 so it is bound to be a bit unstable. And that particular version does artifact a lot.

And what is GTX770? Overclocked version of GTX680. Get your facts straight.

Nowhere did he say it wasn't.

 

[MeteorsRaining]

The R9 280X is just an overclocked version of the 7970 so it is bound to be a bit unstable. And that particular version does artifact a lot.

And what is GTX770? Overclocked version of GTX680. Get your facts straight.

And a lot more stable.

 

[jty0yt]

The R9 280X is just an overclocked version of the 7970 so it is bound to be a bit unstable. And that particular version does artifact a lot.

And what is GTX770? Overclocked version of GTX680. Get your facts straight.

And a lot more stable.

Leaning towards the 770 now then

 

[Denis Stoikovski]

The 280X gives you a better gaming experience than the 770 in all games that are optimized for AMD, for example: Battlefield 4. It costs less money, has more RAM and is just better. The price of the 4GB version of the 770 is so high that u can almost get an R9 290 with it so it would not be a good option.

I prefer the 280X over the GTX-770. Go for it

Dude rly? Can't you see that the difference here is 10$? Or whatever is that valut

It is 10 euro difference for the 2gb 70 not a 4gb.
So what? The 770 is less powerful https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nY8FZnNgxMk now you get the facts! They're almost equal in this situation 770 will be the better choice cuz its only 10$ or euro idk more then the 280x plus ati cards heat more than nvidia.

The R9 280X is just an overclocked version of the 7970 so it is bound to be a bit unstable. And that particular version does artifact a lot.

And what is GTX770? Overclocked version of GTX680. Get your facts straight.

 

[Undying89]

The R9 280X is just an overclocked version of the 7970 so it is bound to be a bit unstable. And that particular version does artifact a lot.

And what is GTX770? Overclocked version of GTX680. Get your facts straight.

And a lot more stable.

Leaning towards the 770 now then

Go for 4GB version. 2GB vram is so last year.

 

[jty0yt]

The R9 280X is just an overclocked version of the 7970 so it is bound to be a bit unstable. And that particular version does artifact a lot.

And what is GTX770? Overclocked version of GTX680. Get your facts straight.

And a lot more stable.

Leaning towards the 770 now then

Go for 4GB version. 2GB vram is so last year.

"So last year" is such a good reason...

 

[Undying89]

The R9 280X is just an overclocked version of the 7970 so it is bound to be a bit unstable. And that particular version does artifact a lot.

And what is GTX770? Overclocked version of GTX680. Get your facts straight.

And a lot more stable.

Leaning towards the 770 now then

Go for 4GB version. 2GB vram is so last year.

"So last year" is such a good reason...

Playing Dead Rising 3 with my 280X and game is using 2.8GB Vram, see my point? Its Watch Dogs all over again.

 

[MeteorsRaining]

770 has NO DIFFERENCE whatsoever in its 2GB and 4GB versions no matter wheather you play on FHD, 2k or even tri FHD.

http://alienbabeltech.com/main/gtx-770-4gb-vs-2gb-tested/3/

There isn’t a lot of difference between the cards at 1920×1080 or at 2560×1600. We only start to see minimal differences at 5760×1080, and even so, there is rarely a frame or two difference. If we start to add even more AA, in most cases, the frame rates will drop to unplayable on both cards.

770 just isn't good enough to utilize 4GB of VRAM.