390 with 8GB memory does sound like a more future proof setup. 970 was a no brainer a year ago, now it depends on your needs.
I own a evga GTX 970 SCC cool quiet and power efficient and also a 980ti sli rig the 970 plays everything really well at 1080p on a 60hz TV BF4 Star wars Battlefront Project cars Fallout 4 Rise of the Tomb raider GTA V Civilization V Minecraft NVidia is quicker with drivers if you want Future proof go AMD but be prepared for slower game ready drivers. Also there DX11 driver is not as good as NVidia DX11 driver (Ignore anything DX12 it is not ready so all current reviews are BETA)
390x over both 970 and 980. AMD cards at all price points are better choice with exception of Fury vs 980TI.
I just built a friend a machine with a 970 in it. Pricing ultimately comes down to region. AMD parts here are somewhat always priced slightly higher than Nvidia parts, meaning you get 980TIs that are around 30-40 USD cheaper than Fury Xs, and 390s that cost as much as 980s. In my opinion from using this card for the last 3 years (versus a friend that used Nvidia) is that Nvidia is generally more stable, at least with new games. Better pick a Nvidia card for people that absolutely don't understand how to fix computers. AMD has nice hardware, but still spotty drivers. Then you have the electricity cost to factor in to. Matters alot when your electricity cost is very high. Just take Guru3d's reviews, if you take a mildly clocked 970 (let's say the Zotac review), versus a mildly clocked 390 (let's say the PCS+ 390), that is a difference of around ~$20 a year.
As all current AMD cards lack HDMI 2.0 support, how can anyone seriously state that 390(x) etc are "Future Proofed" they are not even "Current Proofed". I had 2 Asus DCUII r9 290's in crossfire, they were awesome cards and quiet, but I swapped them out for 2 MSI 970's SLI solely because of wanting to hook up to my 55" Sony Bravia 4k Android TV. I don't know how much adding HDMI 2.0 spec over a HDMI 1.4 port costs, but I'm sure it's not a whole lot, especially when people are dropping £250 - £300 on a card. A massive oversight in my opinion on AMD's part in this day and age, especially when 4K TV's are plummeting in price.
I was in this boat recently, i even had the 390 in the basket one tick away from buying, it was slighty cheaper and came with 8gig compared to the 970, but the memory of driver issues from the last time i had a ATI card, plus i like all the little physx effects in games, simply pushed me to what i was more comfortable with, a nvida card. But i don't think you can go wrong with either cards to be honust, just up to personal preference i suppose.
That's basically it. 980ti is only one worth getting from Nvidia atm. Looking at the 970/980 just isnt worth it at that price range when there is a 390/390X for even cheaper and more/better equipped. Same goes for 960 vs 380/380X.
The big boiling point to me is that the 970 simply performs much better in older games. If I see the benchmarks for the new upcoming games I tend to worry about my 970 but then I simply remember that i'll probably never play The Division, Doom or any other upcoming game for that matter. I then looked @ benchmarks for somewhat recent games I do play and the 970 still outperforms the 390X. Fallout 4, Skyrim with Hi-Res pack, Metro 2033/Last light Redux, Far Cry 3, Witcher 3. It just really isn't a value option if you play games like these, and somehow this keeps being a thing with AMD, even with their CPU's. Sure multi-threaded stuff is gonna help with your FX but you're forever stuck with 35 fps in Skyrim.
This is very well written. I actually ended up buying 970 instead of 390, because 970 was much cheaper when I was buying it. And since I am running 24/7 + folding, electricity bill cap starts to get bigger each month. So yeah, as I also said earlier it comes down to your needs.
arguements over two pages ends with a mutual understanding of preference and usage pattern, Resolutions and then the actual games. If one likes to tinker, amd it is, but if one is ready to play each launch day, well go either way but dont forget hdmi 2.0 if using 4k 60 fps targets, am i correct? going to upgrade in a few months now saving up till then
Sure yeah buying card now is not the best idea, and I'm not in the market for a 970 or 390/X, I've just been reading the same things over and over and decided to test them. It seems like the argument is almost entirely speculative, you assume the 390 will have better dx12 performance but there's no evidence for it at all. One benchmark does not constitute a trend, in particular if it's amd sponsored and it's main purpose is to showcase concurrency in gcn. You say recent games run better on amd, where's the evidence for that, as I posted earlier Hilbert's benchmarks shoe the 390 and 970 being tied in the division at 1440p, if you account for overclocks (whole point of this thread) the 970 takes a lead and encroached on 390X territory. Yes 8GB is more future proof, but I just can't seem to justify the view that 390>970 unless I cherry pick benchmarks at high resolutions and stock clocks, and even then it's not across the board as people claim
970 and 390 are rather equal when both oc'd to max in those games. Especially with latest patches. 390x being tad faster. My old 290x is maybe around 390 level in performance but does not clock that well. Then again it is hard to find benchmarks with new drivers with games like Skyrim, Metro 2033/Last Light redux, Far Cry 3.. Only Last Light bench I found with 390x it has avg fps of 86 vs 72 on 970. While 390 was 79 and 980 was 83. Most games I play are preferable to amd cards and are old. Since I don't really buy these new games until they've been out for like 1-2 years.
Also buying a high end card like 970 390 is pretty bad idea, Pascal is almost here and AMD polaris will make a show. The only card for sure i wouldn't buy is the 970, it is unknown how the 3.5GB will react to future game that will require memory past this point, would prefer 390 and it far more future proof regardless of DX12 or not.
^^That is the thing about the PC, you cannot really future proof it, there will alway be something better right round the corner, bloody corners. lol
True but from the card that u can choose, i feel safer with AMD rather nvidia if kepler poor performance is indication to anything.
^^Yeap, must be nice to have that 8gig sitting there when you need it, even more so if you are going to be gaming at 4k.
extremely satisfied with my 970. overclocks like a beast up to 980 stock performance, with nv drivers it has amazing AA support and choices for dx9. dsr+custom resolutions, nvispector, driver based HBAO+ tweaking. driver management of vram is great, and i've yet to run into issues with that. great cpu overhead in dx11, and great overall driver support across a vast variety of titles, not just 5 triple A games that reviewers play.
