Hozhoz :
but,amd was always cheaper and better in performance,yet it uses more power,look am getting this card for 353$,should i wait for amd ? will the new series compete with that price and performance ?,i heard that it will use 300TDP !! while gtx 970 uses only 175TDP !
AMD historically has owned the low to moderate whereas nVidia has held sway over the moderate to high end.... but it's been very close at 2560 .... not so much at 1920
Since the R9 series came out, the paradigm has shifted in that both companies no longer conservatively clock their cards. So what we saw last generation for example:
Release Date News: "The new 290x beats the 780"
Day After news: "Yeah but the overclocked 780 still beats the overclocked 290x"
Week After News: "The 780 Ti beats everything"
As for the stock 970 (not MSI) and stock 290x ....
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_970_Gaming/27.html
This 3% advantage for the 970 (reference to reference) switches to a 3% disadvantage at 2560 at stock settings..... but if you overclocking, the overclocked 970 edges the overclocked 290x.
The MSI 970 is 17.1% faster than the reference 970
The MSI 290x is 10.2% faster than the reference 290x
Because the R9s are more aggressively overclocked "in the box"
MSI 970 @ 2560 = 97% x 1.171 = 113.6%
MSI 290x @ 2560 = 100% x 1.102 = 110.2%
So which is faster ?
If you doing stock.... the 970 at 1080p and 290x at 1440p
If you doing overclocking.... the 970 at 1080p and 970 at 1440p
But as the differences are just 3%, there is no wrong choice performance wise.... cost, noise, heat and power will be factors more peeps will consider. Cost is kinda wiped out as some of the most popular 970s (MSI Gaming) and 290x's (Sapphire) are within $5.