560 ti SLI upgrade - to what? [Nvidia or AMD]

Conor17777

Reputable
Aug 23, 2014
111
0
4,710
Just finished building my new rig, Running a KFA2 560 ti SLI setup on an x58 sabertooth TUF motherboard, as some of you know the PCI 16x lanes are damn close on the x58's,

http://www.legitreviews.com/images/reviews/1457/asus_sabertooth_6.jpg

Clearance between the GPU's is not even 2mm, and I am starting to feel the heat, playing Battlefield 4 on medium is taxing enough (I think this is because the cards only have 1 GB DDR5 Vram, which I am guessing is a bit small nowadays for anything with decent textures.

Any way I am considering upgrading from the SLI setup to a single card machine, this card has to fit this bill :

- Performance of my current 560 ti SLI Setup
- 3+ GB Vram
- Be less than £250

I can sell each of the 560 ti's for around £80 (seems the going rate for them atm , maybe more as they're Limited Edition) although I would prefer to use one in a HTPC that I am building out of spare parts for my parents.

I was thinking that the GPU would be along the lines of a 7970 / r9 280x . Temperatures are not an issue and neither is noise as I intend on Pairing the card with the Kraken G10 and a decent Asetek cooler (Either the Kraken x40/x60 or possible a Corsair hydro series).

Also the card is to be mounted in a HAF Stacker (925) and so once I get the side window with the 200mm fan I am sure temps will not be an issue at all.

I hope that there is a decent GPU out there, I have a rough idea but I need some help picking out a GPU from some more experienced PC Peeps ;)

 
Solution
They are both good cards, r9 290 better obviously but still you won't be making a mistake buying either one of them... I don't think that Radeon will be releasing new graphic cards any time soon so I don't think if the prices will drop soon...

Is it worth £100 more? I would say yes... It is about 30% faster than r9 280x in battlefield 4, especially if you play in resolution higher than 1920x1080 or more than 1 monitor... And 4GB DDR5 looks more future promising than 3GB DDR5 :)

Conor17777

Reputable
Aug 23, 2014
111
0
4,710


On Amazon atm, going rate for 280x is £240, R9 290 is close to £340, at roughly £100 more, is it really worth the extra £100? performance wise, i mean i would love to get a 290x, but obviously they are much more expensive.

I could delay until christmas when i go to florida and see if there are any newegg deals and if it has gotten any cheaper, but at the moment if temps continue to rise it seems i will be getting a 280x :)
 

Proofy

Admirable
They are both good cards, r9 290 better obviously but still you won't be making a mistake buying either one of them... I don't think that Radeon will be releasing new graphic cards any time soon so I don't think if the prices will drop soon...

Is it worth £100 more? I would say yes... It is about 30% faster than r9 280x in battlefield 4, especially if you play in resolution higher than 1920x1080 or more than 1 monitor... And 4GB DDR5 looks more future promising than 3GB DDR5 :)
 
Solution

Conor17777

Reputable
Aug 23, 2014
111
0
4,710


I don't intend to play on resolutions higher than 1080p so i think i will probably end up going for a 280x as the extra money lets me get the new corsair commander mini, NZXT Hue and some other goodies to help reduce noise and temperature.

Of course i wont be buying until christmas, but hopefully we see a newegg deal or two at christmas time that makes this worth while :)
 

Proofy

Admirable
Hm if you will wait till x-mas you could go with GTX770 which is the same like r9 280x (also has PhysX, shadowplay and other few cool stuff) and will outlast r9 280x, and the price of GTX770 should drop because nvidia is about to release their new 800 series soon so if GTX770 is cheaper than r9 280x at that time I would go for it! :)