290 vs 390 with three 1080p monitors

knightbringr

Distinguished
Oct 28, 2011
57
0
18,630
I upgrade my gpu about every 5 years. I currently have an AMD 6850. I will be using three 1080p monitors.

So when comparing the 290 to the 390, I think the 390 is better due to the 8GB of vram. The problem is that everything I'm reading says that the 8gb of vram in the 390 is completely useless and pointless. Would that still be the case for me since I will be trying to future proof my 3-monitor 1080p setup which (I would assume) would need more vram in the years to come?
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
Most of the benchmark performance difference between the 290X and 390X can be explained by the 100MHz higher stock GPU clock and 20% faster stock memory clock on the 390X.

If you look at 1080p vs UHD benchmarks as a substitute for single vs quad 1080p displays, the extra memory on the 390X makes no difference in benchmark scaling - you get the same 10-15% extra performance over the 290X at either resolution.
 

knightbringr

Distinguished
Oct 28, 2011
57
0
18,630


I was thinking the same thing, but I can't find any concrete data showing that this is the case. Most everyone states that there is no difference or that the difference is negligible. It makes me feel like I'm throwing away $100. Maybe they aren't factoring in future games that will fill up the 8gb of vram especially when considering 3 monitors?
 

knightbringr

Distinguished
Oct 28, 2011
57
0
18,630


I'm not super knowledgeable on current gpu's, but I was looking at just 290 vs 390. Wasn't thinking about the 290x or 390x. Should I make that jump?

 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator

Almost 20% more expensive for 10% more shaders and almost 10% higher clock rate, that's practically 1:1 scaling on bang-per-buck.

If you do not mind spending ~$60 extra, it won't hurt.