GTX 770 vs AMD R9 290?

borisleehk · Nov 11, 2013

Which is better? Both are at the same price in my country. I've heard Nvidia has better driver and AMD has worse, is it really the case?

TripleBullet · Nov 11, 2013

The 290x has much better performance. I would go for that. Although its true that NVidia's drivers are king. 770 would be just as fine but isn't as powerful. Although the 770 would prob be a lil more stable when it comes down to it.

Novuake · Nov 11, 2013

Drivers change, not really the case where AMD is a problem anymore.

The AMD is the MUCH better card but runs hotter. So wait for the aftermarket cards for the 290 and THEN decide. If the aftermarket coolers perform well, then the R9 290 will be the clear choice.

borisleehk · Nov 11, 2013

Novuake :

Is Sapphire a good brand? And does the lack of PhysX matter a lot?

Novuake · Nov 11, 2013

Sapphire is among the best, they are AMDs biggest partner.

PhysX is EXTREMELY limited, there are VERY few titles that use it, same thing goes for Mantle.
Never buy for the gimics like Mantle or PhysX.

Sakkura · Nov 11, 2013

TripleBullet :

The 290 is not the same as the 290X. That said, the 290 is still just plain faster than the GTX 770.

iam2thecrowe · Nov 11, 2013

amd drivers arent that bad really, they do have problems in multi-card setups that are yet to be solved. Single cards are fine. the 290 is far more powerful than a 770, so go for it. If you can wait for a few retail 290 cards to get bench marked, that is what i would do, as they are supposed to perform differently (slower) than the preliminary sample cards given to reviewers.

physx is only used in a hand full of games, its a thing thats nice to have, but doesn't add that much to a game. It can be run on the cpu, but performance is usually not very good. If your planning to get a good monitor in the future then nvidia's gsync might interest you, it will add fliuidity and smoothness to all games. the gsync monitors will likely be expensive, at least at first. At this stage i would just get the 290 since it performs so much better than the 770 in all games.

borisleehk · Nov 11, 2013

iam2thecrowe :

amd drivers arent that bad really, they do have problems in multi-card setups that are yet to be solved. Single cards are fine. the 290 is far more powerful than a 770, so go for it. If you can wait for a few retail 290 cards to get bench marked, that is what i would do, as they are supposed to perform differently (slower) than the preliminary sample cards given to reviewers.

physx is only used in a hand full of games, its a thing thats nice to have, but doesn't add that much to a game. It can be run on the cpu, but performance is usually not very good. If your planning to get a good monitor in the future then nvidia's gsync might interest you, it will add fliuidity and smoothness to all games. the gsync monitors will likely be expensive, at least at first. At this stage i would just get the 290 since it performs so much better than the 770 in all games.

What about the overheating issue that the r9 series cards are having? Do you think it'll be resolved in the aftermarket cards?

Novuake · Nov 11, 2013

Yes, it will.

borisleehk · Nov 12, 2013

So, AMD vs Nvidia, which has better optimization for games like AC4, BF4, Watch Dogs... Etc?

techneutral · Nov 12, 2013

The R9 290 has better core speed (947mhz vs the GTX 770, 863mhz). It also has more GPU memory (4096mb vs 3072mb) and more memory bandwidth (320 GB/s vs 288.4 GB/s). Recommended ram for the R9 290 is 8 gb, recommended ram for GTX 770 is 12 gb.

Other side: the GTX 770 has less power consumption, has a better actual shader performance, and a better memory speed.

Honestly, I would go for the R9 290

Novuake · Nov 12, 2013

borisleehk :

AC4 - Nvidia BY MILES.
BF4 - AMD
Watch Dogs - AMD

Sakkura · Nov 12, 2013

Novuake :

Nvidia actually does a little better than AMD in BF4 at the moment. But Mantle support may change that.

Novuake · Nov 12, 2013

Sakkura :

Yeah.

dbenson18 · Nov 12, 2013

I'm currently in the same debate over the 290 except I'm comparing it to the 780. Some benchmarks have AMDs new card edging out the titan and I'm finding it difficult to just go with the 780 because of its better cooling. I've put of making any decisions until after market coolers are strapped onto the 290 and we can see what they do.

Novuake · Nov 12, 2013

dbenson18 :

Just wait for the aftermarket coolers for the 290, that should clarify a lot for you.

borisleehk · Nov 12, 2013

Doesn't Nvidia have more exclusive features like TXAA, shadowplay.. etc?

Novuake · Nov 12, 2013

borisleehk :

Exclusive is exactly that, EXCLUSIVE, they are either useless, a fancy gimic that very few people will ever use or PhysX that is limited in games.

AMD has a few of their own, which are equally useless.

All marketing.

Sinco · Nov 15, 2013

techneutral :

that is not the right numbers if you pic a Nvida card for the same price the nvida card is gona be something like this
coreclock 1059 MHz boost 1111mhz
4gig ram
mem Clock on all 770 7.01 GHz

256-bit
and picking a evga 770 will be even faster.
i would pick nvida enyday aslong as they are in the same price range,dont get foold by the memory bit rate.
and nvida has better driver overclocking software Everything, And they dont just relese the same card whit just a diffrent number unlike amd.
Just so you dont Think im just a nvida fan i use a amd my self due to price.

Sakkura · Nov 15, 2013

Sinco :

He was getting it mixed up with the GTX 780, which has a core clock of 863 MHz, 900 MHz boost, and 288 GB/s memory bandwidth.

The GTX 770 has significantly fewer shaders, but they do run at higher clocks to partially compensate. It also has less memory bandwidth.

The R9 290 outclasses the GTX 770 when it comes to performance.

As for your claim that Nvidia "dont just relese the same card whit just a diffrent number unlike amd", that's hilariously misguided. Here is a list of recent rebadged desktop graphics cards from Nvidia: GTX 770, GT 645, GT 640, GT 630, GT 620, GT 610, and GT 605. This whole rebadging business is actually something AMD has learned from Nvidia.

Novuake · Nov 15, 2013

Sinco :

WHAT? Hahahha

Soooo the GTX770 is NOT a GTX680?

You sure?

Memory bus width DOES matter if you like high level of AA for example.

And HOW does NVidia have better OCing software?
Hell Nvidia Control Center does not even HAVE overclocking built in, you end up using MSI Afterburner or Precision X, which has NO affiliation with Nvidia.

God damn blind fanboyism.

Grafdelwer · Nov 18, 2013

These two, to me, are not each others competition. Rather compare the R9 280x to the GTX 770, and you have a tight comparison.

The R9 290 wins hands down to the GTX 770 performance wise, but the price for the extra performance is quite higher, too much if you ask me. So, take on average $20 to $30 off the price of the GTX770, buy the R9 280x and you'll have the same (and in most cases higher) performance than the GTX770.

thedesertfox99 · Nov 21, 2013

Sinco :

techneutral :

that is not the right numbers if you pic a Nvida card for the same price the nvida card is gona be something like this
coreclock 1059 MHz boost 1111mhz
4gig ram
mem Clock on all 770 7.01 GHz

256-bit
and picking a evga 770 will be even faster.
i would pick nvida enyday aslong as they are in the same price range,dont get foold by the memory bit rate.
and nvida has better driver overclocking software Everything, And they dont just relese the same card whit just a diffrent number unlike amd.
Just so you dont Think im just a nvida fan i use a amd my self due to price.

Isn't the 770 actually just 680 with higher clock rates?

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-5.html

GTX 770 vs AMD R9 290?

Honorable

Honorable

Champion

Honorable

Champion

Illustrious

Glorious

Honorable

Champion

Honorable

Honorable

Champion

Illustrious

Champion

Honorable

Champion

Honorable

Champion

Honorable

Illustrious

Champion

Honorable

Honorable

Share this page