Is Radeon R9 290x worth double in price than R9 280x

As a titan owner... Just buy at your preferred performance level if you can afford it. I honestly can't be stuffed with price to performance anymore... I just like having the best stuff :D
 
AMD lifted the NDA on real game benchmarks for Tomb Raider and Bioshock.

"In Bioshock: Infinite with the Ultra preset the AMD Radeon R9 290X ran at an average of 44.22 FPS and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 was at 39.63.This shows a significant 11.6% performance advantage for the new AMD Radeon R9 290X with the Hawaii GPU.
Tomb Raider showed the AMD Radeon R9 290X averaging 43.0 FPS and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 was at 40.8 FPS. This would make the AMD Radeon R9 290X roughly 5.4% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 in Tomb Raider.
Read more at http://www.legitreviews.com/benchmarks-amd-radeon-r9-290x-versus-nvidia-geforce-gtx780_126653#DVbKhbQqCErWsgyk.99"

Note that this is in 4K resolution. Don't think regular benchmarking is allowed to be published yet.

I will definitely be buying an R9 290X, since it supposedly comes with Battlefield 4 in the Never Settle bundle. The 290X is going to cost around $1000-$1100 here in Denmark, but after company discounts and BF4 bundle-savings (gonna buy it anyway, so I count it as a saving on the card) it's gonna cost me $345 (BF4 costs $110 here...)
 
Last edited:
Jiniix said:
AMD lifted the NDA on real game benchmarks for Tomb Raider and Bioshock.

"In Bioshock: Infinite with the Ultra preset the AMD Radeon R9 290X ran at an average of 44.22 FPS and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 was at 39.63.This shows a significant 11.6% performance advantage for the new AMD Radeon R9 290X with the Hawaii GPU.
Tomb Raider showed the AMD Radeon R9 290X averaging 43.0 FPS and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 was at 40.8 FPS. This would make the AMD Radeon R9 290X roughly 5.4% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 in Tomb Raider.
Read more at http://www.legitreviews.com/benchmarks-amd-radeon-r9-290x-versus-nvidia-geforce-gtx780_126653#DVbKhbQqCErWsgyk.99"

Note that this is in 4K resolution. Don't think regular benchmarking is allowed to be published yet.

I will definitely be buying an R9 290X, since it supposedly comes with Battlefield 4 in the Never Settle bundle. The 290X is going to cost around $1000-$1100 here in Denmark, but after company discounts and BF4 bundle-savings (gonna buy it anyway, so I count it as a saving on the card) it's gonna cost me $345 (BF4 costs $110 here...)
Click to expand...

With your price I would buy 2 of them :)
How do you cut the price so low?
 
Mombasa69 said:
Sapphire R9 280X Toxic will score higher, and easily compete with a 780.
Click to expand...

This... is nonsense, the sapphire Toxic is just an overclocked R9 280X and will have only an improvement of about 8-10% over the stock R9-280X which makes it sometimes slower and sometimes faster then the GTX770 in games, but it won't compete with the GTX780.

Anyway, I like the toxic card, 8-10% improvement is not much, but it's definitely something + the card doesn't have an extremely high price compared to the stock version.
 
SmileMan said:
This... is nonsense, the sapphire Toxic is just an overclocked R9 280X and will have only an improvement of about 8-10% over the stock R9-280X which makes it sometimes slower and sometimes faster then the GTX770 in games, but it won't compete with the GTX780.

Anyway, I like the toxic card, 8-10% improvement is not much, but it's definitely something + the card doesn't have an extremely high price compared to the stock version.
Click to expand...

GTX 780 has an extremely high price and so will R9 290X apparently :D
 
I still think the 280X or the GTX 770 would be ideal for you. Or if you can get a good deal on one, the good old 7970 GHZ Edition performs very similarly to the 280X and the 770.

There's only so much thinking you can do. If I were you I'd go for it if you had the money.
 
Unless you don't want to overclock the card yourself, I usually advise against buying overclocked cards. You usually pay quite a bit more for performance which you can 'unlock' yourself for free by overclocking.
 
spirit said:
Unless you don't want to overclock the card yourself, I usually advise against buying overclocked cards. You usually pay quite a bit more for performance which you can 'unlock' yourself for free by overclocking.
Click to expand...

With factory overclocked cards, you're sure the cards are stable and well cooled. The toxic from sapphire costs only 20 dollars more or so and you get a pretty high overclocked card with very good cooling. Knowing sapphire it's also a quiet cooler.
 
SmileMan said:
With factory overclocked cards, you're sure the cards are stable and well cooled. The toxic from sapphire costs only 20 dollars more or so and you get a pretty high overclocked card with very good cooling. Knowing sapphire it's also a quiet cooler.
Click to expand...

Yeah, granted, but usually these factory overclocked cards only give you a 10MHz increase or something stupid like that.

Unless that Sapphire one has a decent overclock on it, I'd be tempted to save your 20 dollars and just get the stock-clocked one.
 
spirit said:
Yeah, granted, but usually these factory overclocked cards only give you a 10MHz increase or something stupid like that.

Unless that Sapphire one has a decent overclock on it, I'd be tempted to save your 20 dollars and just get the stock-clocked one.
Click to expand...

Skip lunch one day. You just saved 20 dollars for your Toxic card :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top