
It would have been easy to recommend AMD’s Radeon HD 7870 over the GeForce GTX 660 when it sold for $200. But a recent drop to $180 balances that price range, making it hard to declare a winner. What we do know is that, for another $20, the R9 270X doesn’t really add anything compelling to the story in BioShock Infinite.
In contrast, it’d be hard to not spend an extra $10 on a GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost, given its advantage over the R7 260X, GeForce GTX 650 Ti, and Radeon HD 7790.
At the top end, Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition and R9 280X serve up the best experiences at 2560x1440. To get any more, you’d have to jump all the way up to $400 for a GeForce GTX 770. This big hole in Nvidia’s line-up makes AMD’s new R9 280X the entry point for gamers looking to play demanding first-person titles at 2560x1440 using high detail levels.


The two Tahiti-based cards keep their noses above 50 FPS at 1920x1080, while Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 760 drops to the mid-40s. That’s still fast enough, if you’re playing on a FHD display. But the cheaper Pitcairn-based cards and GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost are quick enough to keep up at 1920x1080.
Gaming at 2560x1440 is a more taxing test of each GPU’s potential. AMD’s Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition and R9 280X maintain at least 35 FPS. Meanwhile, Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 760 spends a lot more of its time under 40 FPS, dipping closer to 30 on one occasion.


Frame time variance is a little higher in BioShock Infinite, but even at 2560x1440, the worst-case numbers don’t look too bad.
- Tahiti, Pitcairn, And Bonaire Show Up For An Encore
- R9 280X: The Tahiti GPU’s Second (Or Third?) Lease On Life
- R9 270X: Pitcairn Gets A Little Boost
- R7 260X: TrueAudio’s First Outing On The Back Of Bonaire
- TrueAudio: Dedicated Resources For Sound Processing
- Display Technology
- Test Setup And Software
- Results: Arma III
- Results: Battlefield 3
- Results: BioShock Infinite
- Results: Crysis 3
- Results: Grid 2
- Results: The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
- Results: Tomb Raider
- CAD: AutoCAD 2013 And Inventor 2013
- OpenGL: Maya 2013 And LightWave
- OpenCL: Bitmining, OpenCL, And RatGPU
- Power Consumption
- Clock Rate And Temperature
- Fan Speed And Noise
- Old GPUs Ride Again, But That’s Not A Bad Thing
I wrote one of the least flattering GTX 780 stories out there. I only identified a couple of situations where a Titan made any sense at all. And although the 760 *did* change the balance at $250, that card still didn't get an award. I liked the 770 for the simple fact that it delivered better-than-680 performance for close to $100 less.
The rest of AMD's new line-up is a lot like what exists already. Again, the 7870 is a better value than 270X. So what are you getting worked up over? The fact that I'm pointing out these aren't new GPUs? They're not.
Best to hold out till the reviews on the R9-290X I guess. But considering the specs I hope for at least 20% performance increases over a 7970.
The MSI R9 280X Gaming at $299 appears to outperform the GTX 770 at 1600P and is within margin of error at 1080P according to Techpowerup. Not a bad value at $100 less and still overclocks well:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/R9_280X_Gaming/26.html
Best to hold out till the reviews on the R9-290X I guess. But considering the specs I hope for at least 20% performance increases over a 7970.
Are the days of (nearly) annual simultaneous full line GPU launches from $100-500 with a dual GPU chip to follow at $750-1000 really over?
I wrote one of the least flattering GTX 780 stories out there. I only identified a couple of situations where a Titan made any sense at all. And although the 760 *did* change the balance at $250, that card still didn't get an award. I liked the 770 for the simple fact that it delivered better-than-680 performance for close to $100 less.
The rest of AMD's new line-up is a lot like what exists already. Again, the 7870 is a better value than 270X. So what are you getting worked up over? The fact that I'm pointing out these aren't new GPUs? They're not.
That goes to you too Mr. NVIDIA
you won't want to. the 260 is more expensive, and you'll only get 1gb of it's memory in a xfire with a 7790. (in xfire/sli, the video memory is duplicated on both cards... not shared... so the total memory of the xfire/sli setup is equal to the smallest total mememory on each of the cards. so a 2gb + 1 gb gpu in xfire will have basically 1gb of vram for the xfire setup.
you won't want to. the 260 is more expensive, and you'll only get 1gb of it's memory in a xfire with a 7790. (in xfire/sli, the video memory is duplicated on both cards... not shared... so the total memory of the xfire/sli setup is equal to the smallest total mememory on each of the cards. so a 2gb + 1 gb gpu in xfire will have basically 1gb of vram for the xfire setup.
the true audio thing is still a mystery. We have to see if this thing really takes off or not. If this thing is at least has a just small success like physyx, I guess I wont mind shelling out just extra $10-20 for it.
the 7970/r9-280x is not competing in the 770's price bracket anymore. the 770 is 400 min... until that price comes down reviewing it against the 7970 would make as much sense as reviewing a 7950 against a gtx 650.
What retailer is doing this deal? I've been holding out to upgrade my 5850 for a while now and a pair of these would be a nice little (gigantic) upgrade
It feels like the price per pixel (in games at a given setting) has stayed the same for a while despite the increase in average display resolutions. Which would equate to gaming getting more and more expensive if you like to max the settings. I don't know if this is AMD/NVidia's fault or the game developers fault or both but it's kind of annoying.