Sapphire r9 280x Toxic vs Gainward Gtx 770 phantom 4gb
Tags:
- Gtx
- Gainward
-
Sapphire
-
Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Ahsankhaan
September 4, 2014 12:31:08 PM
Hello guys , Greeetings
Which card do you think is better ? Toxic costs 39000-40000 here while gainward gtx 770 phantom 4gb cost 46000 , So r9 280x toxic is 15 % cheaper than gainward gtx 770 4gb. Which one would you recommend for watch dogs , hitman absolution , crysis 3 .
Which card do you think is better ? Toxic costs 39000-40000 here while gainward gtx 770 phantom 4gb cost 46000 , So r9 280x toxic is 15 % cheaper than gainward gtx 770 4gb. Which one would you recommend for watch dogs , hitman absolution , crysis 3 . More about : sapphire 280x toxic gainward gtx 770 phantom 4gb
-
Reply to Ahsankhaan
TopLuca
September 4, 2014 12:46:16 PM
Ahsankhaan
September 4, 2014 12:50:27 PM
Related resources
- Sapphire R9 280x 3GB vs Phantom gtx770 4GB - Forum
- Sapphire r9 280x Toxic or Gigabyte 770 gtx 4gb - Forum
- Sapphire r9 280x toxic 3Gb or EVGA gtx 770 4Gb - Forum
- R9 280X Toxic vs Pny gtx 770 4gb - Forum
- r9 280x toxic edition vs EVGA GeForce GTX 770 4GB Dual Classified w/ EVGA ACX Cooler - Forum
TopLuca
September 4, 2014 12:58:34 PM
Ahsankhaan said:
What do you think . Does sapphire r9 280x toxic still has any artifacting or flickering issue left ? Or any driver issue ? I wont be overclocking it So would it run of 100 % load even if i am not overclockingThe Toxic version is the top of the line in sapphire line of products , I think all the drivers issues have been fixed by now.
-
Reply to TopLuca
m
0
l
legend001523
September 4, 2014 1:00:53 PM
Ahsankhaan
September 4, 2014 7:25:42 PM
The GTX 770 coincidentally just got a 15% price drop, so the prices should be pretty close. Hopefully it hits where you live before you need to decide. Even a factory overclocked 280x is going to be slower than a stock GTX 770. The Gainward Phantom is a great card and will run quieter than any 280x.
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-geforce-gtx-770-receives-15-...
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/R9_280X_Gaming_6...
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-geforce-gtx-770-receives-15-...
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/R9_280X_Gaming_6...
-
Reply to 17seconds
m
0
l
Best solution
TopLuca
September 4, 2014 8:29:38 PM
Its hard nowadays to get a un-biased opinion however , Its really down to what games do you intend to play and since the games you want to play favors the 280x as concluded from the benchmarks that I've posted and also the 280x is cheaper then there's no reason to go to the 770 unless you want some peripheral from their's otherwise the 280x is more suited to your intended games. That's not to say that the 770 is worse but they are interchangeable not what others make it seem like that the 770 is simply better.
Here are the benchmarks again :
![]()
![]()
![]()
Its clear that Hitman absolution is an AMD Title
Crysis 3
Even Pulls ahead of the 780 on this occasion on 1080p but it differs according to other benchmarks , the 280X and the 770 are interchangeable according to the website of the benchmark but the frame variance is very stable on the 280x on 1080p
![]()
So Crysis shows that they are very similar , the factory 770 isn't faster than any superclocked 280x in here
Watch Dogs : ( very similar , its within the margin of error )
![]()
So Conclusion time ( Unbiased ) :
Reasons to consider the 770 : 1- Less TDP
2- Runs cooler
3- Less driver issues
4- Shadowplay and other Nvidia's amazing peripherals
5- A very solid card with lots of Vram ( 4gb version ) sufficient for running higher resolutions
6- Comes with Borderlands the Pre-Sequel ( very tempting for me as I am a big fan of the series )
Reasons to consider the 280x :
1- Pulls ahead in your specified games
2- Cheaper
3- Looks better
4- Price to performance is very good
5- Comes with 3 free games
6- The Toxic Version is the top of the line from Sapphire
7- Crossfired on cheaper Motherboards.
Hope I've made it clear for you , its up to you to choose what suits your needs
Here are the benchmarks again :



Its clear that Hitman absolution is an AMD Title
Crysis 3
Even Pulls ahead of the 780 on this occasion on 1080p but it differs according to other benchmarks , the 280X and the 770 are interchangeable according to the website of the benchmark but the frame variance is very stable on the 280x on 1080p

So Crysis shows that they are very similar , the factory 770 isn't faster than any superclocked 280x in here
Watch Dogs : ( very similar , its within the margin of error )

So Conclusion time ( Unbiased ) :
Reasons to consider the 770 : 1- Less TDP
2- Runs cooler
3- Less driver issues
4- Shadowplay and other Nvidia's amazing peripherals
5- A very solid card with lots of Vram ( 4gb version ) sufficient for running higher resolutions
6- Comes with Borderlands the Pre-Sequel ( very tempting for me as I am a big fan of the series )
Reasons to consider the 280x :
1- Pulls ahead in your specified games
2- Cheaper
3- Looks better
4- Price to performance is very good
5- Comes with 3 free games
6- The Toxic Version is the top of the line from Sapphire
7- Crossfired on cheaper Motherboards.
Hope I've made it clear for you , its up to you to choose what suits your needs
-
Reply to TopLuca
Share
Mac266
September 4, 2014 8:43:46 PM
TopLuca
September 4, 2014 8:53:32 PM
Mac266 said:
The GTX 770 is just slightly better, but Naturally comes with a higher price.@TopLuca, im not so sure about some of those benchmarks, they look a bit iffy.
The verdict? Save and get a 280x. No noticable performance difference, and cheaper.
Tomshardware isn't iffy neither is etik , I didn't get these benchmarks myself
My verdict was very clear and very unbiased.
-
Reply to TopLuca
m
0
l
Ahsankhaan
September 5, 2014 12:41:15 AM
TopLuca
September 5, 2014 12:44:45 AM
Ahsankhaan said:
thanks all for sharing ur precious thoughts . i appreciate every reply. One last question , does r9 280x toxic still have artifacts or flickering issue and if i am not overclocking it does it still run on 100 % load ?Nope , after the latest driver updates AMD cards are running with less issues .
-
Reply to TopLuca
m
0
l
wh3resmycar
September 5, 2014 12:54:59 AM
TopLuca
September 5, 2014 12:56:53 AM
wh3resmycar said:
just installed a 280x. this card will not work properly without radeonpro installed. i'd suggest you get a 770 instead. what 280x did you get and what is the model of it ? Have you installed the latest drivers ? Do you have the sufficient PSU ? Lots of things in the mix , the card isn't to blame most of the time , its usually the user's fault.
-
Reply to TopLuca
m
0
l
wh3resmycar
September 5, 2014 1:01:05 AM
lol my fault? for pete's sake i have to use radeon pro to stop it from running @ 1100mhz core running a ps2 console port (re4 hd edition). the card can actually pull 60 fps even @ 500mhz but the fact that i have to use a 3rd party software to do it irks me.
i know my way around graphics cards thank you sir. i don't have problem any problem with the performance, just the aftermarket support is soo AMD.
i know my way around graphics cards thank you sir. i don't have problem any problem with the performance, just the aftermarket support is soo AMD.
-
Reply to wh3resmycar
m
0
l
TopLuca
September 5, 2014 1:03:59 AM
TopLuca
September 5, 2014 1:07:00 AM
This pretty much sums up why the artifacts used to happen : Any card will get that artifacting issue if they run at an unstable speed. Graphics card manufacturers like to make their cards run faster than the reference (AMD set) speed so that the product looks superior. And while it is their responsibility to ensure the cards can run stable at their set speed, it seems certain manufacturers of late have been shoddy in the QC process.
And it seems the R9 280X has the highest failure rate because the R9 280X GPU is actually the same as the older HD 7970. Except that now the chips at 'reference' are essentially overclocked 7970s, so when manufacturers overclock beyond reference they are pushed to extremes and easily become unstable which is what you are seeing now.
Nonetheless the R9 280X is still a good card and it is up to luck if you receive an unstable one. No matter what card you buy be it from AMD or Nvidia you will stand a chance to draw the short stick.
And it seems the R9 280X has the highest failure rate because the R9 280X GPU is actually the same as the older HD 7970. Except that now the chips at 'reference' are essentially overclocked 7970s, so when manufacturers overclock beyond reference they are pushed to extremes and easily become unstable which is what you are seeing now.
Nonetheless the R9 280X is still a good card and it is up to luck if you receive an unstable one. No matter what card you buy be it from AMD or Nvidia you will stand a chance to draw the short stick.
-
Reply to TopLuca
m
0
l
wh3resmycar
September 5, 2014 1:07:52 AM
yup the reason is AMD don't wanna do it. anyway like the OP, i have the same dilemma, the gap in price with a 770 and 280x is huge but overall the performance is good. there are other issues with the drivers as well like image scaling and OG downsampling which is quite easy using a geforce card.
one more feature lacking in CCC is dynamic Vsync. you'll really need radeonpro to fully get everything out of this card.
one more feature lacking in CCC is dynamic Vsync. you'll really need radeonpro to fully get everything out of this card.
-
Reply to wh3resmycar
m
0
l
TopLuca
September 5, 2014 1:08:56 AM
wh3resmycar said:
yup the reason is AMD don't wanna do it. anyway like the OP, i have the same dilemma, the gap in price with a 770 and 280x is huge but overall the performance is good. there are other issues with the drivers as well like image scaling and OG downsampling which is quite easy using a geforce card.one more feature lacking in CCC is dynamic Vsync. you'll really need radeonpro to fully get everything out of this card.
Thankfully it exists
-
Reply to TopLuca
m
0
l
wh3resmycar
September 5, 2014 1:10:23 AM
TopLuca said:
This pretty much sums up why the artifacts used to happen : Any card will get that artifacting issue if they run at an unstable speed. Graphics card manufacturers like to make their cards run faster than the reference (AMD set) speed so that the product looks superior. And while it is their responsibility to ensure the cards can run stable at their set speed, it seems certain manufacturers of late have been shoddy in the QC process.And it seems the R9 280X has the highest failure rate because the R9 280X GPU is actually the same as the older HD 7970. Except that now the chips at 'reference' are essentially overclocked 7970s, so when manufacturers overclock beyond reference they are pushed to extremes and easily become unstable which is what you are seeing now.
Nonetheless the R9 280X is still a good card and it is up to luck if you receive an unstable one. No matter what card you buy be it from AMD or Nvidia you will stand a chance to draw the short stick.
nowhere did i mention it being "unstable". nowhere did i mention "artifact".
-
Reply to wh3resmycar
m
0
l
TopLuca
September 5, 2014 1:11:09 AM
wh3resmycar said:
TopLuca said:
This pretty much sums up why the artifacts used to happen : Any card will get that artifacting issue if they run at an unstable speed. Graphics card manufacturers like to make their cards run faster than the reference (AMD set) speed so that the product looks superior. And while it is their responsibility to ensure the cards can run stable at their set speed, it seems certain manufacturers of late have been shoddy in the QC process.And it seems the R9 280X has the highest failure rate because the R9 280X GPU is actually the same as the older HD 7970. Except that now the chips at 'reference' are essentially overclocked 7970s, so when manufacturers overclock beyond reference they are pushed to extremes and easily become unstable which is what you are seeing now.
Nonetheless the R9 280X is still a good card and it is up to luck if you receive an unstable one. No matter what card you buy be it from AMD or Nvidia you will stand a chance to draw the short stick.
nowhere did i mention it being "unstable". nowhere did i mention "artifact".
That was for the OP , not for you sir.
-
Reply to TopLuca
m
0
l
Ahsankhaan
September 5, 2014 2:53:37 AM
wh3resmycar
September 5, 2014 4:50:53 AM
Related resources
- SolvedR9 280x toxic vs EVGA GeForce GTX 770 4GB Dual Classified w/ EVGA ACX Cooler Forum
- SolvedInno3D GTX 770 HerculeZ 2000 vs. Sapphire R9 280X Toxic Forum
- SolvedAsus GTX 770 DirectCU II OC vs Sapphire Radeon R9 280X Toxic edition Forum
- SolvedSapphire R9 280X Toxic VS Inno3d GTX 770 Ultra 2 Gb 3X Forum
- Solvedasus gtx 770 directcu II OC vs r9 280x sapphire Toxic Forum
- Solvedr9 280x sapphire toxic vs gtx770!? Forum
- Solvedsapphire toxic r9 r280x 3gb vs gygabyte gtx 770 4gb Forum
- sapphire r9 280x toxic vs asus gtx 770 2gb. Forum
- asus gtx 770 2gb vs sapphire r9 280x toxic 3gb..which is best? Forum
- Zotac gtx 770 vs Sapphire Toxic r9 280x Forum
- Need Advice on Sapphire R9 280X TOXIC vs. MSI GTX 770 Lighting Forum
- Gtx 770 4Gb Vs R9 280x Toxic Forum
- EVGA GTX 760 SC 4GB vs Sapphire r9 280x toxic 3GB OC Forum
- Asus GTX 770 DCU II OC 2GB VS EVGA GeForce GTX 770 SC ACX 2GB VS Sapphire Radeon R9 280X Toxic 3GB VS Asus R9280X TOP Forum
- Sapphire R9 280X Toxic 3GB vs. MSI GeForce GTX 770 Lightning 2GB Forum
- More resources
Read discussions in other Graphics & Displays categories
!
