vubaravuewdq
Sign-in / Sign-up

Best Graphics Cards For The Money: June 2015

Best Graphics Cards For The Money: June 2015
By , Don Woligroski

Detailed graphics card specifications and reviews are great, assuming you have the time to do the research. But at the end of the day, a gamer needs to know what the best graphics card is for their money. So, if you don’t have the time to research the benchmarks, or if you don’t feel confident enough in your ability to pick the right card, then fear not. We've compiled a simple list of the best gaming cards offered in any given price range.

June Updates

What a month for graphics news, right?

Computex came and went, giving Nvidia the perfect venue for launching its GeForce GTX 980 Ti. If you’re a hardcore gamer, then you already memorized the card’s spec sheet. But in short, it sports a cut-back version of the GM200 processor found in GeForce GTX Titan X, including 2816 CUDA cores instead of 3072. The GPU also wields 176 texture units (instead of 192) and 6GB of GDDR5 memory (rather than Titan’s 12GB). Nvidia didn’t touch the back-end though, leaving its GM200 with 96 ROPs and a 384-bit memory interface capable of moving up to 336.5 GB/s of data. The changes weren’t enough to affect 980 Ti’s TDP—Nvidia rates it for the same 250W as GeForce GTX Titan X. However, those alterations did carve a big slice out of the flagship’s price tag. Whereas Titan X continues to sell for more than $1000, 980 Ti starts at $650.

As you might imagine, there really isn’t a reason to recommend the Titan at this point (not that the card ever made our monthly column anyway). Now, gamers with money to spend can contemplate the lighter-weight version, weighing it against the GeForce GTX 980. Of course, when the 980 Ti launched, 980s were still going for $550. Someone at Nvidia decided that the gap between them was too narrow though, so it cut GeForce GTX 980 back to $500. Bottom line, if you’re gaming on a 4K screen, consider GeForce GTX 980 Ti a minimum. The 980 is better for 2560x1440 with detail settings cranked up. A GeForce GTX 970 would serve that configuration well too (and for significantly cheaper).  

Even in the face of those price drops, you probably held off on pulling the trigger, knowing full well that AMD’s own ultra-high-end answer was imminent.

The company’s launch made it difficult for us to write a Best Graphics Cards for the Money update any sooner. We already delayed for three weeks, and there’s still more excitement coming. But we have to keep moving.

Before you object, we’ll be publishing a performance review of Radeon R9 Fury X in the next few days. In fact, by the time you read this, we’ll already have the card in our lab, running through our benchmark suite. So yes, today’s story misses our verdict on that model. But we promise it’ll be part of our recap early next month, and that gives us time to comment on the state of availability.

What we have today, then, is a clearer picture of AMD’s 300-series, including the Radeon R9 390X, R9 390, R9 380, R7 370 and R7 360. That’s a lot of cards for one day, right? Well, as we discovered in AMD Radeon R9 390X, R9 380 And R7 370 Tested, they’re rebranded versions of the 200-series. Many at AMD recoil at that word, but it fairly accurately describes the recycling of existing products with minor adjustments and new names. But let’s be clear. There’s nothing inherently wrong with AMD’s approach, so long as the company can keep battling it out with Nvidia based on its performance/dollar. The challenge is simply that the numerator in this equation isn’t being pushed forward very much. Efficiency doesn’t improve either. And the new features we’re seeing represent only what AMD can do using existing technology. If anything, the real winners here are the folks who liked what they saw when these were much younger graphics cards and continue enjoying them today.

So, speaking of competing on the value front, how do these new cards fare? Well, AMD’s suggested price on the Radeon R9 390X is $429, R9 390 is $329, R9 380 is $199, R7 370 should go for $149 and R7 360 is a $109 card.

Sure enough, as of this writing, the Hawaii (now referred to as Grenada)-based 390X is available for $430. That’s $100 more than the Radeon R9 290X. The extra cost is largely attributable to 390X’s 8GB of GDDR5 memory, which can come in useful at 3840x2160. This really isn’t a 4K card though, so we say skip it altogether.

AMD’s Radeon R9 390 starts at $330 online, matching the company's MSRP perfectly. We didn’t get chance to benchmark this one yet, but we know it should compete with Radeon R9 290X and GeForce GTX 770. Its 8GB of GDDR5 will be seen as an asset by some, particularly in light of Nvidia’s memory miscommunications. At the resolutions this card handles best, however, that extra capacity is far less notable than its clock rate increases. This face-off is difficult to call; the GeForce GTX 770 and Radeon R9 390 will both serve you well at 2560x1440 with details cranked up.

As you scale down the stack, AMD’s 300-series hits its stride. The Radeon R9 380 is an interesting board for 1920x1080, particularly because it battles Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 960 at a similar $200 price point. The AMD card is faster, albeit quite a bit more power-hungry. If you disregard your power bill, though, the Radeon is compelling enough to steal away a recommendation from the GeForce. It’s also good enough to vaporize our previous Radeon R9 280 honorable mention.

The Radeon R9 280X could still warrant consideration at $245, but we’re going to pull its recommendation and suggest looking lower for solid 1920x1080 performance and higher for a more satisfactory experience at 2560x1440.

More mainstream gamers will find the R7 370 at AMD’s promised $150 price. Igor seemed to like it in his recent review, calling it “the most palatable of [AMD’s] three models.” In months past, we recommended the R9 270 in this spot. Armed with the same GPU (minus a few shaders) and more aggressive clock rates, plus lower power consumption, it easily slots into the older board’s position.

Radeon R7 360 similarly replaces the R7 260 at that card’s original $109 price point. But because Radeon R7 260X boards are still out there for about $115 with more shaders and texture units, we’re inclined to keep the existing recommendation in place.

Some Notes About Our Recommendations

A few simple guidelines to keep in mind when reading this list:

  • This list is for gamers who want to get the most for their money. If you don’t play games, the cards on this list are more expensive than what you really need. We've added a reference page at the end of the column covering integrated graphics processors, which is likely more apropos for home, office, and basic multimedia usage models.
  • Be sure to check out our new performance per dollar comparison page, where you can overlay the benchmark data we’ve generated with pricing, giving you a better idea where your ideal choice falls on the value curve. The criteria to get on this list are strictly price/performance.
  • Recommendations for multiple video cards, such as two Radeon cards in CrossFire mode or two GeForce cards in SLI, typically require a motherboard that supports CrossFire/SLI and possibly a chassis with plenty of space to install multiple graphics cards. These setups also usually call for a beefier power supply than what a single card needs, and will almost certainly produce more heat than a single card. Keep these factors in mind when making your purchasing decision. In most cases, if we have recommended a multiple-card solution, we try to recommend a single-card honorable mention at a comparable price point for those who find multi-card setups undesirable.
  • Prices and availability change on a daily basis. We can’t base our decisions on always-changing pricing information, but we can list some good cards that you probably won’t regret buying at the price ranges we suggest, along with real-time prices for your reference.
  • The list is based on some of the best U.S. prices from online retailers. In other countries or at retail stores, your mileage will almost certainly vary.
  • These are new card prices. No used or open-box cards are in the list. While these offers might represent a good deal, it’s simply outside the scope of what we’re trying to do.
Display all 85 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 12 Hide
    10tacle , June 21, 2015 10:02 AM
    Quote:
    Didn`t You know that Toms was always anti-amd?:) ) Also why do Monthlly Update before reviewing fury x ...


    1) Just because you as an AMD user don't like the results of what Tom's comes up with does not make them favorable to Nvidia (and vice versa for Nvidia users). I clearly remember Tom's giving a cool reception to the GTX 770 as nothing but a re-branded 680 with and faster speed (which is what it was, just like the 390x vs. 290x except that unlike AMD's $80 price boost with 8GB VRAM over the current market 4GB 290x pricing, the 2GB 770 had a price drop over the 2GB 680 card at the time of market).

    Now let's review their findings of the best card values by US dollar category for this month:

    $65 - Nvidia
    100 - AMD
    115- AMD
    150 - Tie
    200 - AMD
    330 - Tie
    650 - Nvidia
    Dual GPU - AMD

    So removing the ties, we are looking at Tom's picking AMD 2:1 over Nvidia in this month's best GPUs to buy for the money. Any more questions on anti-AMD biases? Sheesh...it's like dealing with children around here sometimes.


    2) I would surmise that Tom's has a calendar to adhere to for consistency. Why should they abandon one of their monthly GPU best of list just because a new card has a paper launch and they have to wait until they get drivers for the card, test it, etc. That stuff takes time. That goes for Nvidia as well. They will catch it on next month's review of the card. Deal with it.

    Oh wait...it was ALREADY EXPLAINED!

    "Even in the face of those price drops, you probably held off on pulling the trigger, knowing full well that AMD’s own ultra-high-end answer was imminent. The company’s launch made it difficult for us to write a Best Graphics Cards for the Money update any sooner. We already delayed for three weeks, and there’s still more excitement coming. But we have to keep moving."



Other Comments
  • 2 Hide
    adamovera , June 21, 2015 12:15 AM
    Archived comments are found here: http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-2630908/graphics-cards-money-october-2014.html
  • 1 Hide
    Cryio , June 21, 2015 1:23 AM
    I think it's been proven at this point that a 260X is as fast or usually faster than a 750 Ti.

    Also, crossfire of 290X in 4K is faster than SLI of 780 Tis/970s/980s. Why is the article still ignoring this ?
  • 3 Hide
    PaulBags , June 21, 2015 2:50 AM
    Why does the performance per dollar chart only have a couple cards on it?
  • 1 Hide
    Corgan , June 21, 2015 2:59 AM
    Quote:
    I think it's been proven at this point that a 260X is as fast or usually faster than a 750 Ti.

    Also, crossfire of 290X in 4K is faster than SLI of 780 Tis/970s/980s. Why is the article still ignoring this ?


    Didn`t You know that Toms was always anti-amd?:) ) Also why do Monthlly Update before reviewing fury x ...
  • 3 Hide
    thezooloomaster , June 21, 2015 3:29 AM
    Quote:

    Didn`t You know that Toms was always anti-amd?:) ) Also why do Monthlly Update before reviewing fury x ...



    Your argument doesn't make much sense seeing as half the cards on the list are AMD, and the 295X2 still tops the list as the flagship...
  • 5 Hide
    tristan huot , June 21, 2015 4:24 AM
    your gpu hierarchy chart is wierd. in reviews : 780 ti under 980, 390x equals 980, 690 equals 980 and the 7990 should be in the same chart as the 980. also titan black should be with 970
  • -2 Hide
    Johnnydex1 , June 21, 2015 5:20 AM
    How many new big releases will we be seeing within the next 6 months? Answer: None. The timing of this article is totally suspicious and makes zero sense.
  • -1 Hide
    darkchazz , June 21, 2015 7:29 AM
    I don't care how much more performance and power efficiency these new cards bring to the table.
    I'm not upgrading from my GTX 670 until there is a die shrink.
  • -2 Hide
    Gurg , June 21, 2015 9:35 AM
    The AMD fanboys are out early. Bring up these two separate but equal 4K Tweaktown comparison tests in side by side windows to show a slow reference 980s vs 290x with 8g as well as reference 980sli and 390xcf. About the only time the AMD boards are significantly higher is in power consumption. Read the charts and weep. LOL

    http://www.tweaktown.com/tweakipedia/74/recap-nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-sli-performance-4k/index.html

    http://www.tweaktown.com/tweakipedia/91/amd-radeon-r9-390x-crossfire-4k/index.html

  • 0 Hide
    10tacle , June 21, 2015 9:48 AM
    Quote:
    Also, crossfire of 290X in 4K is faster than SLI of 780 TIs/970s/980s. Why is the article still ignoring this ?


    Uhm, it doesn't exactly blow away 780Ti SLI...

    http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph7492/59668.png
    http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph7492/59664.png
    http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph7492/59672.png

    And at what price, the price of heat and power specifically?

    http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph7492/59712.png
    http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph7492/59709.png

  • 12 Hide
    10tacle , June 21, 2015 10:02 AM
    Quote:
    Didn`t You know that Toms was always anti-amd?:) ) Also why do Monthlly Update before reviewing fury x ...


    1) Just because you as an AMD user don't like the results of what Tom's comes up with does not make them favorable to Nvidia (and vice versa for Nvidia users). I clearly remember Tom's giving a cool reception to the GTX 770 as nothing but a re-branded 680 with and faster speed (which is what it was, just like the 390x vs. 290x except that unlike AMD's $80 price boost with 8GB VRAM over the current market 4GB 290x pricing, the 2GB 770 had a price drop over the 2GB 680 card at the time of market).

    Now let's review their findings of the best card values by US dollar category for this month:

    $65 - Nvidia
    100 - AMD
    115- AMD
    150 - Tie
    200 - AMD
    330 - Tie
    650 - Nvidia
    Dual GPU - AMD

    So removing the ties, we are looking at Tom's picking AMD 2:1 over Nvidia in this month's best GPUs to buy for the money. Any more questions on anti-AMD biases? Sheesh...it's like dealing with children around here sometimes.


    2) I would surmise that Tom's has a calendar to adhere to for consistency. Why should they abandon one of their monthly GPU best of list just because a new card has a paper launch and they have to wait until they get drivers for the card, test it, etc. That stuff takes time. That goes for Nvidia as well. They will catch it on next month's review of the card. Deal with it.

    Oh wait...it was ALREADY EXPLAINED!

    "Even in the face of those price drops, you probably held off on pulling the trigger, knowing full well that AMD’s own ultra-high-end answer was imminent. The company’s launch made it difficult for us to write a Best Graphics Cards for the Money update any sooner. We already delayed for three weeks, and there’s still more excitement coming. But we have to keep moving."



  • 0 Hide
    Doug Lord , June 21, 2015 10:09 AM
    Can someone tell me 390x2, vs 980ti vs FuryX in 1440p ultra everything and 4k?
  • -1 Hide
    MasterMace , June 21, 2015 10:56 AM
    Theres an issue in the article - the R9 390 is being compared to the 290x, where the 390x is the rebadge of the 290x, according to the previous release article.
  • 2 Hide
    Cryio , June 21, 2015 1:09 PM
    Quote:
    Quote:
    Also, crossfire of 290X in 4K is faster than SLI of 780 TIs/970s/980s. Why is the article still ignoring this ?


    Uhm, it doesn't exactly blow away 780Ti SLI...

    http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph7492/59668.png
    http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph7492/59664.png
    http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph7492/59672.png

    And at what price, the price of heat and power specifically?

    http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph7492/59712.png
    http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph7492/59709.png



    You are using benchmarks from the 290X launch. Since then, 21 months ago, drivers have improved performance a lot. In current games with current drivers, two 290X outperform 780 Tis, 970s and 980s.
  • 3 Hide
    Cryio , June 21, 2015 1:10 PM
    Quote:
    Can someone tell me 390x2, vs 980ti vs FuryX in 1440p ultra everything and 4k?


    Though we don't know how Fury X performs yet,if it's near 980 Ti level, it's pretty much a given two 390X will be the fastest setup between what you listed.
  • -1 Hide
    Tanquen , June 21, 2015 2:31 PM
    Quote:
    We already delayed for three weeks, and there’s still more excitement coming. But we have to keep moving.


    They also said they have have Fury reviews in just 3 days. But they could not wait 3 days? So they can ignore the AMD Fury cards for another month. ???
  • 0 Hide
    Gurg , June 21, 2015 2:53 PM
    Quote:
    Quote:
    We already delayed for three weeks, and there’s still more excitement coming. But we have to keep moving.


    They also said they have have Fury reviews in just 3 days. But they could not wait 3 days? So they can ignore the AMD Fury cards for another month. ???


    Toms was taking a lot of flack from a lot of other readers comments about not having a June version out already. There is no pleasing some of you folks. They don't put it out they get flack, they put it out they get flack.

    AMD in a massive blunder forbid reviews before the 24th, go complain to them. Had AMD released the reviews ASAP most reviewers would have only had slower reference 980Tis to compare with the FuryX. But it looks like by the 24th, up to 20% higher clocked aftermarket cooled 980Tis will be available for comparison. Tom's reviewer stated he already had a 20% higher clocked Gigabyte 980Ti version.
  • 4 Hide
    rayden54 , June 21, 2015 4:30 PM
    @Gurg It does seem like they settled on the worst of both worlds. There's isn't much point in delaying the review if you're not going to delay it long enough to include all of this months releases. Delaying for one, but not the other does seem biased (even if it isn't intended).
  • 1 Hide
    Tanquen , June 21, 2015 7:11 PM
    Quote:
    Quote:
    Quote:
    We already delayed for three weeks, and there’s still more excitement coming. But we have to keep moving.


    They also said they have have Fury reviews in just 3 days. But they could not wait 3 days? So they can ignore the AMD Fury cards for another month. ???


    Toms was taking a lot of flack from a lot of other readers comments about not having a June version out already. There is no pleasing some of you folks. They don't put it out they get flack, they put it out they get flack.

    AMD in a massive blunder forbid reviews before the 24th, go complain to them. Had AMD released the reviews ASAP most reviewers would have only had slower reference 980Tis to compare with the FuryX. But it looks like by the 24th, up to 20% higher clocked aftermarket cooled 980Tis will be available for comparison. Tom's reviewer stated he already had a 20% higher clocked Gigabyte 980Ti version.


    Good grief, it is not an AMD issue. Tom's do what it do as do AMD. They know they can do it in three days but that is too far afield, can't do it. Give me a break. Tom's made a point to say they waited and they knew of the 24th for how long? For what, as well? What’s really new over the last many months? Not much. Everyone that cares knows what the 980ti can do.
  • 1 Hide
    10tacle , June 21, 2015 7:33 PM
    Quote:
    You are using benchmarks from the 290X launch. Since then, 21 months ago, drivers have improved performance a lot. In current games with current drivers, two 290X outperform 780 Tis, 970s and 980s.


    Okay let's try this again. Note these are single card comparos with RECENT Guru3D charts at 4K on June 1 (I'm assuming they are not using two year old drivers). Let's shake it down:

    Hitman Absolution:
    290X - 34
    980 - 33

    Bioshock Infinite:
    290X - 30
    980 - 43

    Tomb Raider:
    290X - 42
    980 - 46

    Metro Last Light:
    290X - 26
    980 - 31

    Thief:
    290X - 26
    980 - 29

    Battlefield Hardline:
    290X - 26
    980 - 25

    GTA V:
    290X - 30
    980 - 31

    Witcher 3:
    290X - 24
    980 - 28

    http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/nvidia_geforce_gtx_980_ti_review,25.html
    http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/nvidia_geforce_gtx_980_ti_review,26.html

    Look...I'm all for the rivalry between Team Red and Team Green benefiting us all. But let's not spread FUD around that is easily debunked...okay?

    PS: drivers do NOT fix heat and power hog issues in 2013 any more than they do in 2015.

Display more comments