Reviews - Sapphire Radeon R9 280 Dual-X

Quote:

---

A new price point keeps the R9 280 in the game.

---

Read more.

Typo in the final paragraph. 290X should read 280X

I really can't figure out why anybody's buying AMD cards in recent years. If you do get a card that's cheaper than its rival at the same performance level, then it's a false economy since the thing is going to cost you more in electricity, and the noise is going to be a problem. Unless you're a headphones-wearing gamer who doesn't pay their own bills, I cannot understand why AMD would be an attractive option. Assuming you run that card for a few years, operational costs are going to be a huge factor.

It seems like the only high-end card that makes sense on price and noise for single display set-ups is the GTX770, but the power efficiency of a "lesser" GTX is perhaps better in the long run even though a low 770 is pretty close in price tag to a 760 now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Otherhand

I really can't figure out why anybody's buying AMD cards in recent years. If you do get a card that's cheaper than its rival at the same performance level, then it's a false economy since the thing is going to cost you more in electricity, and the noise is going to be a problem. Unless you're a headphones-wearing gamer who doesn't pay their own bills, I cannot understand why AMD would be an attractive option. Assuming you run that card for a few years, operational costs are going to be a huge factor.

It seems like the only high-end card that makes sense on price and noise for single display set-ups is the GTX770, but the power efficiency of a "lesser" GTX is perhaps better in the long run even though a low 770 is pretty close in price tag to a 760 now.

---

Not really sure on that view point... say if the difference was around 100W which it most certainly isnt if you look at the 290X vs the 780TI (its direct competitor) it uses 30w less... but regardless back to the 100W extra scenario, run it 3 hours a day 7 days a week ( thats still 21 hours of gaming!) and over a WHOLE YEAR it would cost you between £10 and £20 depending on your electricity unit pricing... I know for me that buying my 7950 boost v2 @ £180 (and selling the game codes as well for a healthy return!) was a very cost effective purchase as the competing products were much more expensive and infact marginal in power usage difference.

If you're really worried about power usage I hear the AMD A10-7850k is a competent platform to use :P.

I am just a little disappointed that this is a rebrand and is more expensive than when I bought mine! Should be a bit cheaper now :(. Wonder what the AMD 300 series will bring? Finally ordered my Oculus rift so I believe I will be in need for an upgrade to get all games running at a solid 75FPS minimum :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Otherhand

I really can't figure out why anybody's buying AMD cards in recent years.

If you do get a card that's cheaper than its rival at the same performance level, then it's a false economy since the thing is going to cost you more in electricity, and the noise is going to be a problem. Unless you're a headphones-wearing gamer who doesn't pay their own bills, I cannot understand why AMD would be an attractive option. Assuming you run that card for a few years, operational costs are going to be a huge factor.

---

What a strange viewpoint. AMD's pitcairn cards are at least as efficient as their nVidia equivalents, often more so, and their compute power completely blows even higher tier nVidia out of the water.

Did you even actually bother looking at the real stats before coming to that opinion?

http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphi...ual-x/?page=10

Those results are giving the exact opposite in what "Otherhand" is saying..

These cards would be absolutely awesome if they weighed in at about £180 with the 760's, very nice card!