Which GPU should i get

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
xXDahChubChubXx

xXDahChubChubXx

Honorable
Aug 26, 2013
276
0
10,860
i have made a similar thread before i know that

anyways i am buying a new GPU i have selected these two:
1) Gigabyte windforce 290 ) $450au ($80 off for a special)
2) Gigabyte windforce 770 GTX 2gb) $415au

So is the extra $15 worth it?
 
Solution
S
At 1920x1080, they both will be very capable cards. The has more VRAM, and higher clock speeds, but the 770 may be more reliable, based upon reviews. In the end it is up to you, but although the 290 is superior in performance, I would personally go with the 770. I'd put reliability and quality over a little bit of horsepower anyday.
Sort by date Sort by votes
S

Swanson

Reputable
Apr 17, 2014
27
0
4,540
290>770, Especially if higher resolution means something to you. I personally have only used Nvidia in the past, but other than the stock cooler, the 290 seems great. Personally, I'd get the 770, despite it not being quite as strong, because of EVGA's customer support and the cooling on Nvidia cards. Either way, you'll get great 1080p performance.

EDIT:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-290-review-benchmark,3659-6.html
Article further supporting 290
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Stickem

Stickem

Distinguished
Mar 25, 2012
124
3
18,710
I am a 770 fan because I own one and I love Nvidia......but the 290 is very nice for the price (%10-%15 faster than a 770 on average). My only concern is heat but the Windforce cooler should cool it reasonably well. Plus, I am not a fan of AMD drivers......they've always been a bit shakey but they are much better as of late. If your a 1080p gamer......either card will run great for you......if your 1440p gamer, then go with the 290.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
paitjsu sadff

paitjsu sadff

Honorable
Jan 29, 2014
1,231
0
11,660

Yeah make it more like 40-45% percent faster, the r9 290 is almost as fast and competes with the GTX780 wich is 50% faster than the GTX770, it would be a no brainer to pick the 770 at these prices no matter what resolution the OP is playing at, benchmarks :
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1068?vs=1037

The 770 is the old GK104 gpu from the 680, nothing more...this radeon card compete with the all mighty GK110 found in the 780's and titans, it's top of the line from AMD...

This card is very well rounded and supports mantle and true audio, i would not pick it over the 780 because of heat and power draw but i would defenetly pick over the 770 anyday even for 25% more $ it would still be worth it.
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
Stickem

Stickem

Distinguished
Mar 25, 2012
124
3
18,710
Woah, not %40-%50..........depends on reference vs oc and a lot of other factors. My MSI Lightning 770 with my overclock is running just slightly behind a reference 780. If he's 1080p gaming........a 780 or 290 will only really net him around %20-%25 more in most games. You ain't going to see %40 more until you start reaching the 290X or 780Ti range big boy. You can't base a decision just off one comparison chart either.........some sites and tests are very partial towards one brand.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

Swanson

Reputable
Apr 17, 2014
27
0
4,540
Yeah, usually you'll see 20-25% more performance out of a 780 compared to a 770, not 50%. But, these performance numbers don't mean too much, as the overclocking and cooling of a card changes it performance drastically, so its hard to compare two cards without being specific on the type.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

Swanson

Reputable
Apr 17, 2014
27
0
4,540
At 1920x1080, they both will be very capable cards. The has more VRAM, and higher clock speeds, but the 770 may be more reliable, based upon reviews. In the end it is up to you, but although the 290 is superior in performance, I would personally go with the 770. I'd put reliability and quality over a little bit of horsepower anyday.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
S

Swanson

Reputable
Apr 17, 2014
27
0
4,540
newegg.ca has Gigabytes 290 with 20% 5-egg (5-star) ratings. Gigabytes 770 has 78% 5-egg. It may seem reliable on paper, but judging from real-world use, it does fall short.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
rolli59

rolli59

Titan
Oct 27, 2007
47,790
283
130,890


And how many % of happy buyers do you belief post reviews on newegg vs unhappy ones? I take user reviews with a grain of salt!
And any day I can get a card with that more performance for $15 I will jump on it!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
paitjsu sadff

paitjsu sadff

Honorable
Jan 29, 2014
1,231
0
11,660
now for the OP...make sure you pick the 290 no matter what this new hawaii gpu from amd is battling in another league up there with the gk110 from nvidia housed in the all mighty gtx780's and titans, that's it...end of discussion.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

Swanson

Reputable
Apr 17, 2014
27
0
4,540
A GPU is more than just cuda cores, real world tests show performance increases of roughly 20-25%. I own a 780, and know it's a great card, but benchmark tests show that the performance isn't just based on the amount of CUDA cores. If it was, overclocking the speed wouldn't increase performance as drastically as it does. I'm not saying the 290 is a bad card, I'm just giving my opinion that the 770 is more reliable based upon what I have read.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
paitjsu sadff

paitjsu sadff

Honorable
Jan 29, 2014
1,231
0
11,660
nvidia gpu's are not ''more reliable'' in any way if that even means anything to begin with...these gpus are top notch the drivers are up to date perhaps even better then nvidia with mantle research going on and everything...also those gpu from amd are covered by the same warranty and everyting i really dont see how nvidia would be ''more reliable'' in any way..sorry. these are plain and simple nvidia fanboy claims and to recommand a gtx770 over a radeon r9 290 you must really dont know anything about gpu's or you are just out of your mind, i'm sorry again...

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
paitjsu sadff

paitjsu sadff

Honorable
Jan 29, 2014
1,231
0
11,660
...oh and yes its defenetly all about cuda cores counts (called stream processors on amd), texture units counts, core clock speed and memory speed...so the fact that the 780 has 50% more cuda cores and 50% more texture unit does make it 50% overall faster clock for clock...now educate yourself.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

Swanson

Reputable
Apr 17, 2014
27
0
4,540
If you read my first post, I clearly stated the 290 was a steal for that price. It is without a doubt a much better performing card. I merely said that my PERSONAL preference would be the 770, whether or not you listen to that is up to you. Although I am somewhat partial to Nvidia, I want OP to have the best performance possible. With the windforce cooler on the 290 to cool it to good temps, it will without doubt out-perform a 770. Although, both will run games in 1080p at 60 fps, the 290 would be smart to future-proof. That said, the 770 does have PhysX. You claim I recommend a 770>a 290, yet I stated the 290 will be 25% faster multiple times. I simply said that the 290 is faster, but I'd take a 770 due to my like for nvidia drivers, the g-sync monitors soon to be released, and physx. Take from it what you'd like, good luck on the decision! Both are quite good cards.

EDIT:
http://media.bestofmicro.com/2/W/421304/original/Performance.png
Percentage difference between 290's and a 770. Highest difference is 22.5% in this test, and that was a liquid cooled 290.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
paitjsu sadff

paitjsu sadff

Honorable
Jan 29, 2014
1,231
0
11,660


ok now you seem like an intelligent individual so let me explain this...do you think that 1 frame per second require x amount of computing power...how to explain this clearly...a card X that can calculate 110 frames per second over the Y card that produce 100 frames is not necesseraly 10% faster, because the frames 101 to 110 are harder to reach then the frames 90 to 100...to reach those 10 extra frames per second the so called X card has to be maybe 15 to 20% faster overall than the card Y...so you can't look at framerate X vs framerate Y in a game and say yes this card is 10% faster, that's not how things work...some cards that are 200% slower then say a 780 achieve 30 frames per second where the 780 reach 65 frames per second, so the 200% faster card does not perform 200% better in terms of framerates but it is indeed 200% faster OVERALL...do you get that is it simple enough for you to understand this way?
so like i said, the amout of computing cuda cores and texture processing units on a card are directly proportional to the overall performance of the card in regard to clock speed... not the amount of frames per second a GPU can reach in a game...i tell you this, the GTX780 is 50% more powerfull in calculation power than a 770 and a r9 290 is 45% faster than a 770...hence the reason why it's the better pick especially if both GPU's are at the same price.

Now please do me a favor and unselect the solution that was picked in this thread to make sure no other user on this forum that are facing the same situation won't take this as a ''best answer'' cause really it's not, if you don't do it i'll ask a moderator via PM to do it for me, i would do it myself but it is not a good thing to do in here...
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom