Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 21

Thread: Sapphire Radeon R9 295X2 vs The WaterForce

  1. #1
    HEXUS.admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    29,935
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1,938 times in 679 posts

    Sapphire Radeon R9 295X2 vs The WaterForce

    Four R9 290X-class of GPUs go up against three GTX 980s.
    Read more.

  2. #2
    ZaO
    Guest

    Re: Sapphire Radeon R9 295X2 vs The WaterForce

    Relatively good for value for money this thing. I think these are gonna start selling like crazy with their new price! Shame Amd don't have a nice Cpu equivelant to go with this thing lol... >_<

  3. #3
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    27
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts

    Re: Sapphire Radeon R9 295X2 vs The WaterForce

    Very nice, but one would be the preferred option.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Kingdom of Fife (Scotland)
    Posts
    4,991
    Thanks
    393
    Thanked
    220 times in 190 posts
    • crossy's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS Sabertooth X99
      • CPU:
      • Intel 5830k / Noctua NH-D15
      • Memory:
      • 32GB Crucial Ballistix DDR4
      • Storage:
      • 500GB Samsung 850Pro NVMe, 1TB Samsung 850EVO SSD, 1TB Seagate SSHD, 2TB WD Green, 8TB Seagate
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix GTX970OC
      • PSU:
      • Corsair AX750 (modular)
      • Case:
      • Coolermaster HAF932 (with wheels)
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro 64bit, Ubuntu 16.04LTS
      • Monitor(s):
      • LG Flattron W2361V
      • Internet:
      • VirginMedia 200Mb

    Re: Sapphire Radeon R9 295X2 vs The WaterForce

    We'd still opt for three GeForce GTX 980s instead of four GPUs housed inside two R9 295X2s, based on our testing, but AMD does win out when value is as important as sheer performance.
    Unless I'm reading the figures wrong, I'd slightly disagree with that last bit. According to your benchmarks, the AMD solution (cheaper remember!) manages to beat the best of the Green team in Bioshock, Crysis and Grid benchmarks, and it's pretty close on the 3D Mark, with NVidia pulling ahead on Tomb Raider and Total War.

    I'd come to the conclusion that - ignoring the noise and power draw - that the top end from NVidia and AMD are pretty evenly matched. Decision then becomes whether to take the purchase cost saving and put that against the increase power needed to run the beastie.

    Not that this is likely to be an issue for me since I'm firmly stuck on the 1080p res gaming.

    Career status: still enjoying my new career in DevOps, but it's keeping me busy...

  5. #5
    AlexKitch
    Guest

    Re: Sapphire Radeon R9 295X2 vs The WaterForce

    1200W?! That's like running a powerful microwave oven. Potentially for hours on end. Every day.

    That'll make for an eye-watering electricity bill.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    321
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    27 times in 18 posts
    • Brian224's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte GA-Z68AP-D3
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core i5-2500K
      • Memory:
      • 8GB (2x4GB) Corsair Vengeance
      • Storage:
      • Samsung 840 SSD 120GB, Seagate 2TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • GTX760 4GB
      • PSU:
      • 650W EZCool Silent
      • Case:
      • Corsair Graphite 230T
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 8.1 Professional 64-bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • 3 x Acer G226HQLBbd
      • Internet:
      • 30 Mb cable (Virgin Media)

    Re: Sapphire Radeon R9 295X2 vs The WaterForce

    Quote Originally Posted by AlexKitch View Post
    1200W?! That's like running a powerful microwave oven. Potentially for hours on end. Every day.

    That'll make for an eye-watering electricity bill.
    The difference between both options is about 7p an hour, so you would need to game for about 21,000 hours on quad Crossfire to eat up the price difference of about £1500. That is 8 hours a day, 7 days a week for 7 years. If you played 24/7 (or in shifts with friends) you could cut the payback on the Nvidia cards to about 2 1/2 years though

  7. #7
    Senior Member Spreadie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    an island in the south
    Posts
    1,759
    Thanks
    284
    Thanked
    324 times in 231 posts
    • Spreadie's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ickle tiny fing
      • CPU:
      • six corrs, 12 freds
      • Memory:
      • sixteen gigglebytes
      • Storage:
      • four terribads
      • Graphics card(s):
      • yep, got one o' them
      • PSU:
      • big & smol
      • Case:
      • NCase M1
      • Operating System:
      • Win 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 32 throbbing inches with a slight curve
      • Internet:
      • two tin cans and some wet string

    Re: Sapphire Radeon R9 295X2 vs The WaterForce

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian224 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by AlexKitch View Post
    1200W?! That's like running a powerful microwave oven. Potentially for hours on end. Every day.

    That'll make for an eye-watering electricity bill.
    The difference between both options is about 7p an hour, so you would need to game for about 21,000 hours on quad Crossfire to eat up the price difference of about £1500. That is 8 hours a day, 7 days a week for 7 years. If you played 24/7 (or in shifts with friends) you could cut the payback on the Nvidia cards to about 2 1/2 years though
    Price difference of £1500? Are these cards free then?

    The review says they'd still opt for three 980s, not specifically the Waterforce trio. Three OC'd 980s might come in at £1500 total, less the £1000 ish for the 295x2s. That's nearer £500 than £1500.
    Last edited by Spreadie; 17-12-2014 at 06:00 PM.
    Before you judge a man, walk a mile in his shoes; after that, who cares?! He's a mile away and you've got his shoes!


  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    489
    Thanks
    8
    Thanked
    37 times in 31 posts
    • Roobubba's system
      • Motherboard:
      • MSI P55 GD60
      • CPU:
      • Intel i7 860 @ 3.58GHz (Megahalems + Apache)
      • Memory:
      • 8GB Patriot Viper DDR3
      • Storage:
      • 80GB Intel X25-M + bunch of HDDs
      • Graphics card(s):
      • ATI 5870 + Earplugs.
      • PSU:
      • TAGAN 800W
      • Case:
      • Lian Li V1110 (bit disappointing)
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Samsung 24" LCD (TN)
      • Internet:
      • Virgin Media 20MBit

    Re: Sapphire Radeon R9 295X2 vs The WaterForce

    Then you'd have to factor in whether it's worth using them for mining, and the relative hash rates you'll get between the red and green team.

    I am pretty sure that I could do the calculations, but really I can't be bothered

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    321
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    27 times in 18 posts
    • Brian224's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte GA-Z68AP-D3
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core i5-2500K
      • Memory:
      • 8GB (2x4GB) Corsair Vengeance
      • Storage:
      • Samsung 840 SSD 120GB, Seagate 2TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • GTX760 4GB
      • PSU:
      • 650W EZCool Silent
      • Case:
      • Corsair Graphite 230T
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 8.1 Professional 64-bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • 3 x Acer G226HQLBbd
      • Internet:
      • 30 Mb cable (Virgin Media)

    Re: Sapphire Radeon R9 295X2 vs The WaterForce

    Quote Originally Posted by Spreadie View Post
    Price difference of £1500? Are these cards free then?

    The review says they'd still opt for three 980s, not specifically the Waterforce trio. Three OC'd 980s might come in at £1500 total, less the £1000 ish for the 295x2s. That's nearer £500 than £1500.
    True, I was taking the price of the graphics setup that was used in the comparative tests as some of the comments on noise and temperature may not apply to the standard cards. Even so, it would still take about 2 1/2 years at 8 hours a day, 7 days a week of 4K gaming to recover the difference. Frankly, if you can afford either setup, I doubt you will worry too much about the electricity bill - especially if you factor in the free space heating provided by the AMD cards

  10. #10
    Seriously casual gamer KeyboardDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,013
    Thanks
    774
    Thanked
    280 times in 242 posts
    • KeyboardDemon's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Sabretooth Z77
      • CPU:
      • i7 3770k + Corsair H80 (Refurbed)
      • Memory:
      • 16gb (4x4gb) Corsair Vengence Red (1866mhz) - (Because it looks good in a black mobo)
      • Storage:
      • Crucial M550 SSD 1TB + 2x 500GB Seagate HDDs
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX 980 SC ACX 2.0 (Warranty replacement for 780Ti SC ACX)
      • PSU:
      • EVGA 750 watt SuperNova G2
      • Case:
      • Silverstone RV03
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus Swift PG278Q
      • Internet:
      • BT Infinity (40mbs dl/10mbs ul)

    Re: Sapphire Radeon R9 295X2 vs The WaterForce

    What I found most interesting was that for less than £500 it is possible to get a dual GPU set up that beats the single GTX980 cards which start at £430 for stock reference models and slightly more for overclocked non-reference models. Had the choice been available to me when I bought my GTX780Ti then my GPU may well have been flying a different colour.

  11. #11
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    88
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts

    Re: Sapphire Radeon R9 295X2 vs The WaterForce

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian224 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by AlexKitch View Post
    1200W?! That's like running a powerful microwave oven. Potentially for hours on end. Every day.

    That'll make for an eye-watering electricity bill.
    The difference between both options is about 7p an hour, so you would need to game for about 21,000 hours on quad Crossfire to eat up the price difference of about £1500. That is 8 hours a day, 7 days a week for 7 years. If you played 24/7 (or in shifts with friends) you could cut the payback on the Nvidia cards to about 2 1/2 years though
    BOTH... are eye-watering on the running cost front is the point. These set ups will raise your elecy bill each month compared to a 'normal' setup.

  12. #12
    AlexKitch
    Guest

    Re: Sapphire Radeon R9 295X2 vs The WaterForce

    Well, numbers aside, I think I'm a bit unusual in that I'd rather actually not own power guzzling hardware like this, regardless of whether I could afford the electricity bill.

    I'm actually more impressed by moderately powerful setups that manage to be 'Green'. My own setup at home could be described as 'high end' in terms of its benchmark and gaming performance, and can probably chew through 500W on full throttle, but when I'm just sat listening to music or writing code it's using barely anything at all. Probably less than 100W. This pleases my OCD.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    141
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    10 times in 8 posts

    Re: Sapphire Radeon R9 295X2 vs The WaterForce

    Quote Originally Posted by Tarinder
    Positive performance-related upsides are ameliorated by huge power consumption and increased noise that is rather too conspicuous when compared to a custom setup like the Gigabyte WaterForce
    I don't think the use of ameliorated is correct as melioration/amelioration is a positive development process.

    Perhaps counterpoised would be more apposite?

    I only discovered the word melioration when looking for an alliterative title for a F1 blog post a few months back, so it stuck out like a sore thumb when I read it.
    Last edited by Michael H; 19-12-2014 at 12:05 AM.

  14. #14
    Not a good person scaryjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    15,149
    Thanks
    1,224
    Thanked
    2,273 times in 1,865 posts
    • scaryjim's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Dell Inspiron
      • CPU:
      • Core i5 8250U
      • Memory:
      • 1x 8GB DDR4 2400
      • Storage:
      • 128GB M.2 SSD + 1TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon R5 230
      • PSU:
      • Battery/Dell brick
      • Case:
      • Dell Inspiron 5570
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 15" 1080p laptop panel

    Re: Sapphire Radeon R9 295X2 vs The WaterForce

    Quote Originally Posted by GrahamC View Post
    ... These set ups will raise your elecy bill each month compared to a 'normal' setup.
    Turning on more things uses more electricity - shocker! </dailymail>

    If you've invested heavily in your gaming rig as your main pastime you'll probably find that the cost of running your PC during gaming for a month isn't actually any more expensive than, say, going to the movies once a week, or having a gym membership. I mean, it's not like your computer is just using that power up to no end - you're investing that running cost in your entertainment. 1200w from the wall costs about 15p an hour. A frugal (say, 200W) machine will cost around 4p an hour. I'm willing to bet that plenty of people would consider 11p an hour a reasonable cost for being able to turn all the pretties up to maximum on a 4k screen

  15. #15
    ZaO
    Guest

    Re: Sapphire Radeon R9 295X2 vs The WaterForce

    I'm pretty sure my electric costs 26p pKWH during the day. So, if I gamed on a rig drawing 1000W while gaming for 4 hours a day, that'd be £87.36 per quarter. Now if I had a rig that only drew 500W while gaming, that'd be £43.68 per quarter. Something like that can make a big deal to me when it comes to paying the bills! Please correct me if I'm wrong on those calculations. I do have a habbit of messing up with numbers

  16. #16
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    8
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts

    Re: Sapphire Radeon R9 295X2 vs The WaterForce

    Doesn't "ameliorated" mean "made better"?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •