R9 290 or GTX 780?

[kmang]

Hello, i am building a new system and i am having trouble deciding wether to get one of the 2 cards listed above. I have narrowed it down to these 2.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130918&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-_-na-_-na-_-na&cm_sp=&AID=10446076&PID=3938566&SID=
EVGA GTX 780 Superclocked 3GB

OR

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202080&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-_-na-_-na-_-na&cm_sp=&AID=10446076&PID=3938566&SID=
Sapphire Tri-X R9 290 4GB

I will be playing on a 1080p monitor, and playing games such as heavily modded Skyrim and Fallout, CS:GO, Battlefield and games like that. I understand these cards share similar performance but i would like the opinion of some other people. These are the other components i will be using (a lot of parts such as the CPU come from an old system) http://pcpartpicker.com/p/3PK9j
Any input would be appreciated, thanks!

 

[i7Baby]

For 1080p - the 780. For 1440 or above - the 290

 

[JaredzzC]

I would say the R9 290. In terms of price/performance, it wins over the GTX 780 and also it has 4GB which will help with higher resolutions and for future games as they tend to require more VRAM. Believe it or not, some games are almost reaching 3GB of VRAM at the moment ( but usually it's around 2GB ). I have an R9 290 myself (I chose it over the GTX 780) and I am absolutely loving it. Also, the Mantle API will be integrated for many upcoming games because more and more companies are implementing it (recently Crytek) so it will take a lead for definite over the 780 in those games. For now, the cards are quite neck and neck to be honest, but why pay $100 more for a similar card with less VRAM? I understand nvidia has some features that many people like, but to me, having previously owned a nvidia card, they're not worth the extra money.

 

[kmang]

I would say the R9 290. In terms of price/performance, it wins over the GTX 780 and also it has 4GB which will help with higher resolutions and for future games as they tend to require more VRAM. Believe it or not, some games are almost reaching 3GB of VRAM at the moment ( but usually it's around 2GB ). I have an R9 290 myself (I chose it over the GTX 780) and I am absolutely loving it.

Which manufacturer did you go with?

 

[wombatp3]

Both great cards and good value atm. I have just bought 2 x 290x although I've always been an Nvidia fan. The reason is that I think the 290x scales better in crossfire. As resolutions climb they start to seriously outperform the 780, in my case specifically for eyefinity (3 monitors gaming). Of course, it also depends which games you spend most time on, as some are optimized for Nvidia, some for AMD. The point about VRAM is also valid. 6gb 780s have just become available (EVGA) and the mark-up is not too bad. My 290x cards are from a small batch produced with 8GB each. Not really necessary but becoming more so with increasing textures across high res. For future proofing, if you think you may add a second card one day, remember that cards in SLI/Xfire effectively duplicate each other's VRAM, so 2 x 3GB cards doesn't give you 6 GB of usable VRAM. Heavily modded Skyrim can still be one of the best looking games around and it can easily exceed 2gb VRAM with highest textures. BF4 is an AMD optimised game. Lots to consider, good luck.

 

[i7Baby]

The 290 - get Sapphire.

The 780 - get Asus

 

[JaredzzC]

I would say the R9 290. In terms of price/performance, it wins over the GTX 780 and also it has 4GB which will help with higher resolutions and for future games as they tend to require more VRAM. Believe it or not, some games are almost reaching 3GB of VRAM at the moment ( but usually it's around 2GB ). I have an R9 290 myself (I chose it over the GTX 780) and I am absolutely loving it.

Which manufacturer did you go with?

I didn't really choose to be honest. I bought the R9 290 when it first came out so I had the reference version, but then I had to RMA it, and because they didn't have anymore reference cards, they gave me the XFX DD (Double Dissipation) version, but I do like the Tri-X version you have listed (I'd most likely choose the Tri-X over the XFX one I have).

 

[kmang]

Both great cards and good value atm. I have just bought 2 x 290x although I've always been an Nvidia fan. The reason is that I think the 290x scales better in crossfire. As resolutions climb they start to seriously outperform the 780, in my case specifically for eyefinity (3 monitors gaming). Of course, it also depends which games you spend most time on, as some are optimized for Nvidia, some for AMD. The point about VRAM is also valid. 6gb 780s have just become available (EVGA) and the mark-up is not too bad. My 290x cards are from a small batch produced with 8GB each. Not really necessary but becoming more so with increasing textures across high res. For future proofing, if you think you may add a second card one day, remember that cards in SLI/Xfire effectively duplicate each other's VRAM, so 2 x 3GB cards doesn't give you 6 GB of usable VRAM.

I know either of these cards will perform well in any game, but in skyrim and fallout specifically, would the 290 at 1080p ultra with 100+ mods be ample to get exceptional fps?

 

[JaredzzC]

I know either of these cards will perform well in any game, but in skyrim and fallout specifically, would the 290 at 1080p ultra with 100+ mods be ample to get exceptional fps?

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-290-review-benchmark,3659-10.html

As you can see, there is hardly anything between them, but this was at launch and the Tri-X version will run faster due to it being overclocked. the R9 290 will be absolutely fine, and I think it's the safer option because the mods and texture will require a lot of VRAM which the R9 290 can provide. Unfortunately I am not able to find any benchmarks for fallout new vegas, but no doubt at 1080p the r9 290 will be fine.

 

[kmang]

I know either of these cards will perform well in any game, but in skyrim and fallout specifically, would the 290 at 1080p ultra with 100+ mods be ample to get exceptional fps?

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-290-review-benchmark,3659-10.html

As you can see, there is hardly anything between them, but this was at launch and the Tri-X version will run faster due to it being overclocked. the R9 290 will be absolutely fine, and I think it's the safer option because the mods and texture will require a lot of VRAM which the R9 290 can provide.

Hmm, what about the gtx 780 6gb? Would it be worth the extra money?

 

[i7Baby]

Post a link to it

 

[JaredzzC]

If you're only going to be gaming at 1080p, then i'd say that there is no need for 6GB because that would be useful if you were gaming at higher resolutions, not so much at 1080p. Probably best that someone else give their opinion on the 6GB version...

 

[kmang]

Post a link to it

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487040&cm_re=gtx_780-_-14-487-040-_-Product

It is actually alot more expensive, i think if the price on the 780 3gb doesnt change i'lll go with the 290, but while we're here what does it mean for a GPU to be "classified"

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130943&cm_re=gtx_780_classified-_-14-130-943-_-Product

 

[JaredzzC]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487040&cm_re=gtx_780-_-14-487-040-_-Product

It is actually alot more expensive, i think if the price on the 780 3gb doesnt change i'lll go with the 290, but while we're here what does it mean for a GPU to be "classified"

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130943&cm_re=gtx_780_classified-_-14-130-943-_-Product

"Classified is the highest end model that we offer for any particular series."
http://forums.evga.com/tm.aspx?m=1356626

If you really are going to ONLY be playing at 1080p and don't plan on going something like triple monitor later on or maybe 1440p, then honestly, the 6gb variant is just money that you won't get back ( in my opinion ).

 

[i7Baby]

Thanks - that's a new one for me. No performance increase (same CUDA) just vram. Maybe in 3 x SLI for 4k. But not needed for 1080 or maybe even 1440p for one monitor.

 

[wombatp3]

I think the 4GB 290 would be your best choice (the best deal you can find on a non-reference version). I only mentioned the higher VRAM options in case you had any monitor upgrade plans in the short term. Also, I should point out that I'm in Australia and our import duty is nil on items under $1000 and that greatly affects GPU value comparisons.

 

[Karadjgne]

For a standard 1080p, I'd do the 780 over the 290 all day. For 3 monitors, the 780. For higher resolution monitor or 3 of them, then I might...maybe, take a chance on the 290, but chances are I'd still opt for the 780.

Not because I dislike AMD, I actually do like AMD, I just have a strong distrust of AMD drivers. Apart from the old bs posts about 'which is better' it seems like fully half of the remaining posts are problems stemming from AMD drivers just failing to work correctly. Personally I'd rather have slightly lower performance, than have to take a 50% chance on being thoroughly disgusted and frustrated at such a large expense for so little return.

 

[JaredzzC]

For a standard 1080p, I'd do the 780 over the 290 all day. For 3 monitors, the 780. For higher resolution monitor or 3 of them, then I might...maybe, take a chance on the 290, but chances are I'd still opt for the 780.

Not because I dislike AMD, I actually do like AMD, I just have a strong distrust of AMD drivers. Apart from the old bs posts about 'which is better' it seems like fully half of the remaining posts are problems stemming from AMD drivers just failing to work correctly. Personally I'd rather have slightly lower performance, than have to take a 50% chance on being thoroughly disgusted and frustrated at such a large expense for so little return.

Seems a bit harsh.... the AMD drivers are fine now...
I've had both nvidia and AMD cards... A 5770, A GTX 570 and an AMD R9 290. For the both times that I've had the AMD cards, everything has been fine. Of course, it's no doubt that at the start the drivers weren't the best, but same applies to nvidia. It's been over 6 months since release and the drivers are well optimised.

 

[17seconds]

Only Nvidia cards allow you to force Ambient Occlusion on Skyrim. This adds more depth and realism to shadows in the game and produces a higher quality image throughout. In the image below, Skyrim on AMD cards looks like the "AO: OFF" screenshot.

http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/guides/the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim-tweak-guide#19

 

[JaredzzC]

^^
Couldn't a similar look be achieved with enb series?