which is better gtx 970 or r9 390?

[illuminati_MLG]

There seems to be a huge battle between the R9 390 and the GTX 970. could someone please actually explain the differences between these 2 and why one is better?

 

[Grimwinder]

They bench out very close, with each beating the other slightly in various test categories. The major pluses for each, outside of raw performance are-

970- lower power usage, quieter/cooler, better drive support from Nvidia.
390- 8gb of vram which helps at resolutions higher than 1080p.

Personally, if I was gaming at 1080p I'd take the 970 just for the support, if I was gaming above that, I would take the 390 for the vram. My 2 cents.

 

[rmpumper]

Yep. 970 for 1080p-1200p, 390 for 1440p and higher.

 

[neieus]

IMO Grimwinder makes some good points when it comes to 970 vs 390 support and power draw however I previously owned a 970 and if I had it to do it all over again I would have went with the 390. Nvidia does have better driver support however their drivers still have issues... issues I can honestly say I never experience with my previous card which was a HD 7950. Then even if some don't consider it a issue with the memory debacle and how it was handled the experience left a really bad taste in my mouth. If not for the EVGA step up option moving me up to the 980 Ti I would have sold the 970 and got the 390x with it's fully addressable 8GB of ram regardless if I'd even be able to use it or not.

 

[jerdle]

To answer your question, the 390 is a better card.

The 970s advantage is using a little less power, but at this level of cards that shouldn't matter to anyone.

It's like buying a muscle car then complaining about lower gas mileage.

The 390s advantage is its memory isn't purposefully gimped, it has more than twice as much effective vram, radeon cards performance relative to geforce cards improves over time, and better performance should you choose to add a second card in the future.

 

[eodeo]

390 is better at over 1080p, but really neither is fast enough for over 1080p anyway. At 1080p its a wash and 970 is cooler and quiter all other things being equal. It doesn't go to 3d clocks just because you have 2 monitors or you're watching a 240p Youtube video- which is nice- unlike 390 that thinks those tasks are super hard and goes full retard.

If you don't care about power, or nvidia optimized games- go for 390, it is the better gaming card and its hardware is better.

I already own 970 and wouldn't switch to AMD for far too many reasons to list here. Most of them dealing with I'd take nvidia software over AMD software any day. AMD makes good hardware but terrible terrible software. Going full voltage/3d clocks just to play a 240p youtube video should say it all right there.

 

[jerdle]

An an owner of both NVIDIA and amd cards, I can say your claim that amd has terrible terrible software is not only wrong, but terribly terribly wrong. If anything ive experienced more stability from amd software.

And saying the 390 is isn't fast enough for 1440p is just nonsense.

 

[eodeo]

If you only play games on a single monitor, I imagine 390 is fine. If you play videos or own more than one monitor AMD is just poor. Both in quality and efficiency. Both are software deficiencies.

If you play Witcher 2 1440p is fine. If you would like to play Withcer 3, it's both low ambient occlusion option since- not nvidia gpu- and 35fps. Which is fine, if you're a console peasant.

 

[neieus]

I agreed with jerdle... I've owned both brand cards throughout the years and until I moved back to the green team did I experience issues but I did manage to work through them eventually.

 

[jerdle]

I run 4 displays, 3 of which are gaming on 1440p in eyefinity off an AMD card. I am completely satisfied with the experience, both setting it up to act as one display, and the running of it as such.

Have you ever actually owned a Radeon in this decade?