Which GPU is better out of the two below???

They both link to the same gpu.

amd 400 line is onsale as there newer gpu are dropping in a few weeks.

GPU One : http://bit.ly/2kIgWMU
GPU Two : http://bit.ly/2kIgWMU

Where's the other card to compare!

Agree. Gaming X.
Same card here. Runs cool and quiet.

The Gaming X is a higher series card and comes with some fancy LED effects, they both use the same PCB

The cooler is much better on the Gaming X than the Armor.

While the coolers are slightly different, I have not observed any significant difference in cooling or performance. They both use the same exact fans. In examining both, I found little difference other than the Gaming series has a backplate and has 8 + 6 pin connectors (300 watts - 150+75+75) whereas the Armor has only the 8 pin (225 watts 150 + 75). That might impress the overclockers who don't look too closely but as the card can, under no circumstances draw more than 193 watts, the extra connector provides no benefit whatsoever. Same with the cooler.

Now normally I'd be tickled about these difference and be touting the advantages of the Gaming X, except for one thing ..... and that is Boost 3 which nerfs the cards negating any advantage that the Gaming X would otherwise provide. Looking at the coolers' feature set, you would expect that Gaming X to overclock higher because of the backplate and extra power. But because of Boost 3, we can never to get to a place where these component advantages actually deliver anything.... especially when they have the same PCB.

So, with the 1070 for example, the Gaming X is $404 right now In US and the Armor is $370. For the extra 434, you get a better built card, the problem is, that $34 isn't getting you any more performance because Boost 3 negates those component advantage that the Gaming X provides. If anyone ever develops a BIOS editor for the 10xx series cards, you would be able to remove that nerf and see some advantage.

Right now, at max OC we are seeing temps of 72C with overclock .... so if a better cooler could deliver 75C, it doesn't mean anything ebcause since both are under 82C, the card will not throttle and therefore, performance will be the same.

Now in Canada, with the Gaming X 480 8 GB at $325, and the Armor OC at $300, you could spend the extra $25 and take satisfaction knowing that you card has better componentry ... or you could get the Armor taking satisfaction knowing that you saved $25 and, subject to the vagaries of the silicon lottery, got the exact same performance. I would say that neither is a wrong decision.

The deciding factor I have seen in most builds of late has been the user choosing based upon coloer so as to match their case theme.

Both have 8-pin connectors. The heat sinks are not the same. Armor is a two tube type, where the gaming X has three pipes with taller & more numerous fins.

Like I said, depends on user's goals.... If budget not an issue, I wouldn't argue against buying a 1,000 pound hoist to lift a 350 pound load. In a Krait MoBo based build, I'd definitely tale the Armor or Quicksilver tho because the differences will have an actual observable / measurable impact (aesthetics). On a more typical red / black theme, the Gaming Z is there for those w/ no budgetary concerns.

For budget conscious users, there is a significant impact. The cost savings would pay for two case fans.... or perhaps allow a case, PSU or K series processor upgrade.

Yep, higher performance is by no means guaranteed. Lower temps and quieter operation is though. In my experience keeping temps lower generally gives you better stable overclocks - not always the case though, sometimes you lose the silicon lottery hard.