R9 390 v GTX 970 (VRAM worries)

[Uzrav]

Hi guys!

So, story made short, I currently have an i5-4670k and an R9 280x. I'm 94% positive the GPU is faulty, as I occasionally have some crazy artifacting (textures are like rubber, get stretched across screen) and small lag spikes in every game I play. I could try to RMA the card but it just sounds like a pain, and I'd rather shoot for a small upgrade. Budget is around $350 so that puts both the R9 390 and GTX 970 in my sights.

I was originally thinking about a GTX 970 but the whole 3.5GB fiasco turned me off a little. I'm just a bit worried the card won't age as well as the R9 390 will with its - admittedly a bit overkill - 8GB VRAM. However, from what I've seen, the R9 390 doesn't have the horsepower to take advantage of its VRAM though. CF'ing could take advantage of it (though that brings up more issues like micro-stuttering) but would require quite a beefy PSU so I may still go with a 970. I'll be purchasing a 1440p monitor when I head off to college next year, but currently am gaming on a 1080p monitor. Any advice on which card would be best for the next 2-3 years would be very welcome!

This is the 970 I was looking at: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127850
as well as the R9 390 I was looking at: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202148

 

[DJ Susbilla]

Hi guys!

So, story made short, I currently have an i5-4670k and an R9 280x. I'm 94% positive the GPU is faulty, as I occasionally have some crazy artifacting (textures are like rubber, get stretched across screen) and small lag spikes in every game I play. I could try to RMA the card but it just sounds like a pain, and I'd rather shoot for a small upgrade. Budget is around $350 so that puts both the R9 390 and GTX 970 in my sights.

I was originally thinking about a GTX 970 but the whole 3.5GB fiasco turned me off a little. I'm just a bit worried the card won't age as well as the R9 390 will with its - admittedly a bit overkill - 8GB VRAM. However, from what I've seen, the R9 390 doesn't have the horsepower to take advantage of its VRAM though. CF'ing could take advantage of it (though that brings up more issues like micro-stuttering) but would require quite a beefy PSU so I may still go with a 970. I'll be purchasing a 1440p monitor when I head off to college next year, but currently am gaming on a 1080p monitor. Any advice on which card would be best for the next 2-3 years would be very welcome!

This is the 970 I was looking at: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127850
as well as the R9 390 I was looking at: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202148

R9 390 is cool but if u want gtx 970 cause it has recording software such as shadowplay and twitch streaming which i use constant. But really its up to you in the current market the 390 is actually more powerful than the gtx 970. The VRAM ISSUE only effected if u are running gta 5 or bf4 on 4k high textures. If you are just gonna play csgo or source games then the gtx 970 is better in my opinion cause of the recording software and the twitch software. AND IF U HAVE A NVIDIA SHIELD U CAN STREAM STREAM STREAM on ok wifi. But really if u want power go r9 390 if u want bitching ass features go with gtx 970

 

[Uzrav]

R9 390 is cool but if u want gtx 970 cause it has recording software such as shadowplay and twitch streaming which i use constant. But really its up to you in the current market the 390 is actually more powerful than the gtx 970. The VRAM ISSUE only effected if u are running gta 5 or bf4 on 4k high textures. If you are just gonna play csgo or source games then the gtx 970 is better in my opinion cause of the recording software and the twitch software. AND IF U HAVE A NVIDIA SHIELD U CAN STREAM STREAM STREAM on ok wifi. But really if u want power go r9 390 if u want bitching ass features go with gtx 970

Hm, I actually don't care too much about Shadowplay and the Shield stuff, never really wanted to use something like it but I certainly wouldn't say no to extra features 😀 Anybody else have an opinion on this? I have read that the 970 OC's very well, especially the MSI version, so that's a nice positive...

 

[jossrik]

I have the 970 from EVGA, and I like it better than my 290Xs I had previously. I'm on a 4k monitor (playing older games like D3 and Rift) and it does all right. I am going to be using EVGAs step up program for a 980 ti though. Then next year I'll add another 980 ti to the mix, well, maybe, we'll see what games I'm on then. +1 for the 970 though. @ 1080p you'll be fine with the 4/3.5Gb thing, at 1440p I'd say the cards are on equal footing, past that I'd have to consider the 390. The cards will age about similar. The high Gb will only come in handy for crossfire on higher resolutions in most cases.

 

[renz496]

At 1080p probably there isn't much to worry about the VRAM issue. 8GB was simply excessive. Pronably not even 2 way 390X can use that 8GB effectively. I still remember in one of HardOCP test few years back about 670 4GB version. In their test only 3 way 670 have the grunt to utilize that much VRAM

Now there is concerned about future games using more VRAM. it is a valid concerned but i do think VRAM increase will also increase the need of raw gpu power. Just ask people that actually own 970. Most of them say the card will have difficulty to maintain 60fps even before VRAM usage able to reach 3.5GB. So far the only games that really crazy about VRAM usage was ACU. Even on lowest preset the vram usage can exceed 2GB on lower resolution.

 

[gamer1357]

I would take the 390 since you said you are upgrading to 1440p in the future. The 390 handles games at 1440p better than the 970 and it doesn't hurt to have the extra VRAM.

 

[sernac]

I just went through the same dilemma and pulled the trigger on the exact 970 you linked (MSI Gaming 100ME) last night - this morning it's $10 more.

This GPU is the first upgrade to the first PC i built almost 4 years ago - below are some of deciding factors in favor of the 970 that I concluded from my "research".

- heat/noise/efficiency - this is a personal preference typically and may not matter to you but i haven't read anything that disagrees that NVidia is significantly ahead in these departments
- new tech vs old - in plain language, 390 is supposedly an overclocked 290 with a few more shaders and 970 uses sub-par chips from 980's - hence the 3.5GB ram nonsense and kind of explains the gap in efficiency
- drivers - this one is more or less word-of-mouth but NVidia appears to be ahead here as well and, conspiracy theories aside, no1 wants to deal with software/driver issues.
- OC - according to numerous posts, 970 can easily be OC'ed from ~1100 stock to 1500 whereas 390 is already pretty much maxed out

With all these things in mind, I don't understand how people say that the 390 is a better card for the future - extra VRAM can only do so much with subpar drivers and architecture.

That and i got suckered in with all the marketing stuff MSI is pushing with this 100ME version - gold caps, military grade components and extensive testing are hard to verify but I'd like to think it's all true.

 

[jerdle]

As a military acquisitions officer, I'm going to go ahead and tell you now: Buying something with military grade listed is another way of saying charging more for same product. 😉

Also the 390 is actually a better overclocker than the 290x in spite of the fact that it already ships with higher clocks.

As for why the 390 is a better card for the future, its because its a better card. As time shifts the prices around it may not always be the better card per dollar, but it will still be the better card.

 

[Uzrav]

I just went through the same dilemma and pulled the trigger on the exact 970 you linked (MSI Gaming 100ME) last night - this morning it's $10 more.

This GPU is the first upgrade to the first PC i built almost 4 years ago - below are some of deciding factors in favor of the 970 that I concluded from my "research".

- heat/noise/efficiency - this is a personal preference typically and may not matter to you but i haven't read anything that disagrees that NVidia is significantly ahead in these departments
- new tech vs old - in plain language, 390 is supposedly an overclocked 290 with a few more shaders and 970 uses sub-par chips from 980's - hence the 3.5GB ram nonsense and kind of explains the gap in efficiency
- drivers - this one is more or less word-of-mouth but NVidia appears to be ahead here as well and, conspiracy theories aside, no1 wants to deal with software/driver issues.
- OC - according to numerous posts, 970 can easily be OC'ed from ~1100 stock to 1500 whereas 390 is already pretty much maxed out

With all these things in mind, I don't understand how people say that the 390 is a better card for the future - extra VRAM can only do so much with subpar drivers and architecture.

That and i got suckered in with all the marketing stuff MSI is pushing with this 100ME version - gold caps, military grade components and extensive testing are hard to verify but I'd like to think it's all true.

Yeah I think I'm going to go with the 970 and stick with Nvidia this time around. That MSI 970 just looks fantastic and I'd rather not deal with driver issues and a loud and hot AMD card again 😛 Thanks to everyone for their replies though! It was a tough decision and you guys definitely helped me out. Maybe the VRAM will come into play in a few games but I'm willing to compromise on quality for those as I think the 970's pros warrant it.