R9 390 vs GTX 970

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Nonscrub

Nonscrub

Reputable
Jan 26, 2016
137
0
4,680
My build without video card:
[PCPartPicker part list](http://pcpartpicker.com/p/vgPtcf) / [Price breakdown by merchant](http://pcpartpicker.com/p/vgPtcf/by_merchant/)

Type|Item|Price
:----|:----|:----
**CPU** | [Intel Core i7-6700K 4.0GHz Quad-Core Processor](http://pcpartpicker.com/part/intel-cpu-bx80662i76700k) | $374.99 @ SuperBiiz
**CPU Cooler** | [Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler](http://pcpartpicker.com/part/cooler-master-cpu-cooler-rr212e20pkr2) | $28.04 @ Amazon
**Thermal Compound** | [Arctic Silver 5 High-Density Polysynthetic Silver 3.5g Thermal Paste](http://pcpartpicker.com/part/arctic-silver-thermal-paste-as535g) | $6.89 @ OutletPC
**Motherboard** | [MSI Z170A KRAIT GAMING ATX LGA1151 Motherboard](http://pcpartpicker.com/part/msi-motherboard-z170akraitgaming) | $153.98 @ Newegg
**Memory** | [Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-3000 Memory](http://pcpartpicker.com/part/corsair-memory-cmk16gx4m2b3000c15) | $89.88 @ OutletPC
**Storage** | [Samsung 850 EVO-Series 250GB 2.5" Solid State Drive](http://pcpartpicker.com/part/samsung-internal-hard-drive-mz75e250bam) | $88.00 @ Amazon
**Case** | [Corsair SPEC-03 Red ATX Mid Tower Case](http://pcpartpicker.com/part/corsair-case-cc9011052ww) | $69.99 @ Newegg
**Power Supply** | [SeaSonic 520W 80+ Bronze Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply](http://pcpartpicker.com/part/seasonic-power-supply-m12ii520bronze) | $63.99 @ SuperBiiz
**Operating System** | [Microsoft Windows 10 Home OEM (64-bit)](http://pcpartpicker.com/part/microsoft-os-kw900140) | $89.99 @ NCIX US
**Monitor** | [Asus VG248QE 144Hz 24.0" Monitor](http://pcpartpicker.com/part/asus-monitor-vg248qe) | $249.00 @ Amazon
**Keyboard** | [Cooler Master CM Storm Devastator Gaming Bundle Wired Gaming Keyboard w/Optical Mouse](http://pcpartpicker.com/part/cooler-master-keyboard-sgb3011kkmf1us) | $28.99 @ SuperBiiz
**Headphones** | [Corsair Raptor HS40 7.1 Channel Headset](http://pcpartpicker.com/part/corsair-headphones-ca9011122na) | $49.82 @ Amazon
**Other**| SteelSeries QCK Mousepad| $7.04
**Other**| Rosewill RTK-002 Anti-Static Wrist Strap| $5.99
| *Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts* |
| **Total** | **$1306.59**
| Generated by [PCPartPicker](http://pcpartpicker.com) 2016-03-14 10:24 EDT-0400 |
So R9 390 (not X) or GTX 970?
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
The 970:

1. At your chosen 1080p, it tops the 390 outta the box.

perfrel_1920.gif


2. The 970 is faster than the 390 (and 390x) when both are overclocked at both 1080p and 1440p based upon TechPowerups testing. The 970 OCs about 17%, the 390 about 7%, 390x 6% ... increasing the performance lead to 14%

3. The 970 produces less heat and requires less power.



 
Upvote 0 Downvote
For your build and resolution, the 970 is definitely better. Especially given the power requirements. I think at 520W, you might be hitting a ceiling if you used a 390.

I'd recommend upgrading the PSU anyways if you're buying it all right now. Give yourself some headway on possible future SLI if you find you want to add a second card.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The R9 390 is stronger than the GTX 970 , but your power supply may not be sufficient for the R9 390. Either get a quality 600w psu + r9 390 or just buy the gtx 970.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


In what way ? ... the 970 is faster outta the box, is 14% faster when both are overclocked and having more than 4 GB is totally useless at his resolution at 1080p (and 1440p). It also produces lower heat, draws less power and runs quieter.



 
Upvote 0 Downvote
In terms of raw performance R9 390 is more powerful and more futureproof than GTX 970 with that 8 gigs of ram.
[video="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9cKZiJw6Pk"][/video]

Though, your power supply is not powerful enough to handle R9 390 so either buy a new and more powerful PSU that is 750W and above(for future upgrades) OR just buy GTX 970 since 520W is well enough to run it.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
8GB is absolutely useless ay 1080p and 1440p. It would be used at 4k but unfortunately no card currently exists that can run 4k at 30 fps at the settings required to do 4k

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/213069-is-4gb-of-vram-enough-amds-fury-x-faces-off-with-nvidias-gtx-980-ti-titan-x/5

While we do see some evidence of a 4GB barrier on AMD cards that the NV hardware does not experience, provoking this problem in current-generation titles required us to use settings that rendered the games unplayable any current GPU. It’s reasonable to ask why we didn’t fine-tune results, attempting to measure the impact of just going over the 4GB threshold with the GTX 980 Ti or Titan X, and then test with those settings. Unfortunately, GPU-Z simply doesn’t measure accurately enough to make this possible.
Click to expand...

As for Jayz two cents, he overcharged. And wasn't an apples and apples comparison he uses a gimped EVGA 970 SC in his comparison

1. The EVGA SC uses a stock VRM, why not compare MSI w/ MSI where both have better VRMs ? The EVGAs SC is a reference card and can't match the MSI non-refernce card.

2. The EVGA SC model was limited in its OC by the fact that 1 of the 3 heat pipes misses the GPU.

3. Other brand / model non-reference cards routinely get over 1500 MHz but jay was only able to make 1440.

Paul here got 1560 MHz w/ o voltage increase (9:00 mark)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vuh132EsuA
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
8GB is useless now but could be useful in the future since today's devs tend to use a lot of VRAM since they know they can and also it's always nice to know that VRAM will not be a limiting factor after years go by.

Here's another guy saying R9 390 is better and it's even getting better every day because of better drivers.
[video="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udXCusTnRsY"][/video]
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
No, it's not going to help in the future ... except > 1440p as its simply a matter of pixels....1080p simply can not get you there. If you want to run 4k, I'd have to 1st point out that no pair of cards in existence can satisfactorily run 4k at 60 fps and highest settings, I will say that the 390 is the better choice at 4k ... but a 23.6 versus 22.3 fps advantage is nothing to crow about.

witcher3_3840_2160.gif


Sure we could go back and forth posting comparisons which favor one or the other but the overwhelming majority of tests show the 970 coming out an top.... and on top of the 390x as well when both are overclocked.

There's also the G-Sync versus Freesync issue ... G-Sync and Freesync do the same thing below 60 hz and both do it well, but G-sync monitors come with a hardware module which will allow the OP to utilize ULMB ... AMD has no hardware module in Freesync.

While a step below the 970, I'd heartedly recommend the 380 or 380x over nVidias offerings, the 970 and 390 just don't match up well. The 970 has become the most popular card ever made, it has outsold all AMD R7 and R9 2xx and 3xx cards (IIRC that's 26 cards to date) combined.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Okay, say no more.
crysis3_1920_1080.png

civbe_1920_1080.png

bf4_1920_1080.png

bf3_1920_1080.png

acu_1920_1080.png

watchdogs_1920_1080.png

madmax_1600_900.png


Any by the way, using Witcher 3 for benchmarks is just bollocks. That game is basically made for Nvidia cards.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


There's no real way to know if said YouTuber really knows what they're talking about or not... So no, they're not reliable sources of information.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
at 1080p a 970 will do better however due to more vram a 390 will do better at 4k and at 1440p they are about equal.
however what i would do is get a 6600K and use the extra money and get a gtx 980 or even a 980 ti if you have the money mostly because the cpu is a beast compared to the gpu
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

At microcenter there's a huge deal for the 6700k for $317 so no way am I passing that up.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom