Need some advice: gtx970 vs R9 290x

[alexw]

First: Hi I'm Alex and I'm new here

I'm building new rig and it will be in this case: Silverstone Raven Z RVZ02B
This case accepts graphics up to 13" long and 4.78" wide (more without holder apparently)
So there is Sapphire R9 290X 4G on french amazon for 230quid (sacrebleu!)

my dillema: go for this (heat and power problem biggest sfx is 600w), wil it fit?

wait for sale on gtx 970 (get free game, can buy cheaper 500w PSU -30quid)

which will be more future proof and more quiet? heat doesn't concern me...

other parts i5 4690, MSI Z97I or asus z97,
thanks for your input

[Domestic_Ginger]

I would check to make sure:

O the 290x will really need 600w. Reviews should tell you and keep in mind these are draws from wall usually so do not take into account PSU efficiency.

O the 290x comes with a good cooler and compare it to the 970 cooler for noise. A 290x great cooler vs a leaf blower on the 970 may tip it the other way.

O compare reviews of the games and what resolution you want to play at. Special features like g-string and free-love may influence your monitor buying decisions.

[EndlessWaves]

O the 290x will really need 600w. Reviews should tell you and keep in mind these are draws from wall usually so do not take into account PSU efficiency.

Draw from the wall is after efficiency losses, the amount the computer is drawing from the PSU is lower than that.

You could potentially get away with less than 600W with that CPU. The 290X is a 300W card and you only need around 150W for a non-overclocked system with very few extra components (IIRC the RVZ02 doesn't even take 3.5" drives).

Future proofing will depend on the monitor situation. Right now the big question is whether the current nVidia cards will support DisplayPort's Adaptive Sync (which AMD markets as Freesync) and what'll happen to the nVidia's brand specific G-sync implementation of the technology.

If you've bought a shiny new non-variable refresh rate monitor in the last couple of years and don't plan to change it for the life of the computer than the GTX 970 is puts out less heat so it's easier to cool quietly. If will buy a new monitor within the life of this machine then I'd be inclined to go for a 290X or 390.

[kalniel]

Draw from the wall is after efficiency losses, the amount the computer is drawing from the PSU is lower than that.

This. And the supply rating is for what this component draw is, not the wall draw, so efficiency is irrelevant when working out which supply to chose for a given card.

[alexw]

From what I've read, 290x is better at higher resolution and has 4gb instead of 3.5
which i think maybe important fact - apparently GTA V can use all vram on 970 on hi-res.

I have 1080p monitor now but 4k prices are going down so I'll buy one next year and it would be nice play games at 4k med settings

Power and heat concerns - so you think 600w will be enough? (i'm gonna have 2xhdd and audio interface on usb)
I'm gonna use Silverstone Strider 600W 80PLUS Gold Semi Fanless PSU (if i buy 290x), and I'm thinking that it may get hot (case dont have any fans and it will get cramped in there)

[alexw]

Oh and the VR thing, I've found some recomended specs for VR and 970 was mentioned, I wonder if there is any technology in nvidia cards that AMD don't have and may be relevant?

[Domestic_Ginger]

I would check to make sure:

O the 290x will really need 600w. Reviews should tell you and keep in mind these are draws from wall usually so do not take into account PSU efficiency.

Am I not explained it well?

Wall reading x efficiency = real power draw from the psu. At 100W and assuming 80-90% efficiency its a 10-20W shift, okay not noticeable. You take it up to 400W and you're looking at 40-80W; suddenly we're moving between different PSUs.

[kalniel]

Am I not explained it well?

Wall reading x efficiency = real power draw from the psu. At 100W and assuming 80-90% efficiency its a 10-20W shift, okay not noticeable. You take it up to 400W and you're looking at 40-80W; suddenly we're moving between different PSUs.

Which is I think what we're saying - the reviews that measure power usage often do so at the wall, so you have to take into account the efficiency of the PSU they tested with to work out the real power requirement if that's how you're measuring how much a card needs.

Once this is done, the efficiency of the unit you are considering is irrelevant - if the real power requirement of a system is 360W then a PSU rated to give at least 360W is fine, regardless of it's efficiency, since efficiency only affects the wall draw, not the amount of power supplied to the components.

[EndlessWaves]

From what I've read, 290x is better at higher resolution and has 4gb instead of 3.5

The GTX 970 has 4GB. Having 1/8th of the memory being slower doesn't matter, there is plenty that needs to be in memory but doesn't need quick access. The issue was that developers need to be aware of this mechanism so stuff that requires fast access isn't placed there and nVidia's communication was poor.

Power and heat concerns - so you think 600w will be enough? (i'm gonna have 2xhdd and audio interface on usb)

USB2 ports provide 2.5W of power, USB3 4.5W.

600W is more than enough.

Oh and the VR thing, I've found some recomended specs for VR and 970 was mentioned, I wonder if there is any technology in nvidia cards that AMD don't have and may be relevant?

nVidia were a bigger supportor of Stereoscopic 3D. AMD worked fine but they just licensed 3rd party software rather than developing their own. A wide move as it turned out given this iteration of the Stereoscopic 3D fad lasted no longer than previous ones. It remains to be seen whether VR will last any longer, although I doubt it personally.

[Dinklegeta]

290x with the latest driver updates, amd have squeezed a lot from it.

[Connell_]

If noise is really an issue for you, I'd say the 970 is the way to go. Aside from the fact that 290X produces more heat, which requires the fans to spin faster and create more noise, the 600W PSU has an 80mm fan, as opposed to the 120mm on the 500W, which I imagine would be noticeably louder, especially when paired with the higher power draw of the 290X.

[alexw]

I know, R9 could get hot and loud, opposed to 970, i need to check the db levels on 290x and 390 nitro which became second/third choice..
and hopefully PorcupineTime (he got one) gonna provide some feedback about this 600 PSU

[Connell_]

I know, R9 could get hot and loud, opposed to 970, i need to check the db levels on 290x and 390 nitro which became second/third choice..
and hopefully PorcupineTime (he got one) gonna provide some feedback about this 600 PSU

What resolution will you be playing at?

[alexw]

What resolution will you be playing at?

As I mentioned earlier, I have 1080p monitor now but 4k prices are going down so I'll buy one next year...
I want to futureproof it as much as I can, I know 390 is not powerfull enough for 4k max settings but medium maybe? OC 380 nitro is getting 33fps with max settings in gtaV , witcher3 - 29 fps (according to kitguru)

[Connell_]

As I mentioned earlier, I have 1080p monitor now but 4k prices are going down so I'll buy one next year...
I want to futureproof it as much as I can, I know 390 is not powerfull enough for 4k max settings but medium maybe? OC 380 nitro is getting 33fps with max settings in gtaV , witcher3 - 29 fps (according to kitguru)

Hmmmm... I would think a 390 would be your best bet at 4k, but it'll probably be quite noisy and require you to get the more expensive and louder PSU. I'm facing a similar predicament. I play at 1440p and need a new GPU, but only have around £250 to spend and I don't really fancy the idea of a 390 due to its heat and noise output. I'm probably going to end up getting something like a 970 to put me over until Pascal or Arctic Islands are released. Perhaps you could do the same seeing as you won't be getting a 4k monitor until next year?

[alexw]

Hmm, I'm biased toward 390 even though It'll be more expensive. In few reviews I've read, temps at load arent that big nor the noise and overclocked gets you few fps more than 970 at UHD which when you tune down settings gonna be playable... Plus having more vram is never a bad thing In the end I'm waiting two weeks for sale and will go for either one.