Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › Graphics Cards - General › R9 290 or GTX 780??
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

R9 290 or GTX 780?? - Page 15

post #141 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdr09 View Post

1300 on the classy? that's 1200 on the 290(non X). if they go that high but some of them do. nah, prolly just 1175 1150 will match that classy.

edit: btw, i posted a couple of my benchies in that review of yours. thanks.

A 1150MHz 290X wouldn't and didn't match that Classy. Since the vanilla 290 is about 5% slower than X clock-for-clock, that would mean a 1210MHz wouldn't quite get there. So maybe 1220-1230MHz. That's far from average.
The Air Tunnel
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4820K (4500MHz@1.28V) P9X79 Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X New Edition Team Group Vulcan 4x4GB 2133MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
2x240GB SSD @RAID 0 Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 Windows 10 Pro Corsair AX750 
CaseAudio
Rosewill Armor EVO hiFace+AudioGD+DT770Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
The Air Tunnel
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4820K (4500MHz@1.28V) P9X79 Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X New Edition Team Group Vulcan 4x4GB 2133MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
2x240GB SSD @RAID 0 Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 Windows 10 Pro Corsair AX750 
CaseAudio
Rosewill Armor EVO hiFace+AudioGD+DT770Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #142 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by specopsFI View Post

A 1150MHz 290X wouldn't and didn't match that Classy. Since the vanilla 290 is about 5% slower than X clock-for-clock, that would mean a 1210MHz wouldn't quite get there. So maybe 1220-1230MHz. That's far from average.

yes, it will.wink.gif
Second Intel Rig
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2700 4.5/ 1.28 77 290 (2) 16 / 1866 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1000 360/240 10 64 28 2160 
PowerCase
850 540 
  hide details  
Reply
Second Intel Rig
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2700 4.5/ 1.28 77 290 (2) 16 / 1866 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1000 360/240 10 64 28 2160 
PowerCase
850 540 
  hide details  
Reply
post #143 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdr09 View Post

yes, it will.wink.gif

No it didn't. Stop being a broken record and provide some proof if you still insist on commenting.

As for my own testing, 780 only needed 86MHz more than 290X (that is with the X) to comfortably beat it on average across 13 benchmarks.

Here's a very thorough testing showing a 780 @1163MHz (actual clock, not showing in the charts) being on average 2-4 % slower than a 290X @1130MHz:

http://img.fcenter.ru/imgmat/article/videocards/AMD_Radeon_R9_290X_4Gb/207186.png

It's safe to say that 100MHz is enough core clock advantage for the 780 to beat the 290X. A vanilla 290 will need to get within 60-70MHz of a 780 to match it.
The Air Tunnel
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4820K (4500MHz@1.28V) P9X79 Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X New Edition Team Group Vulcan 4x4GB 2133MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
2x240GB SSD @RAID 0 Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 Windows 10 Pro Corsair AX750 
CaseAudio
Rosewill Armor EVO hiFace+AudioGD+DT770Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
The Air Tunnel
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4820K (4500MHz@1.28V) P9X79 Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X New Edition Team Group Vulcan 4x4GB 2133MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
2x240GB SSD @RAID 0 Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 Windows 10 Pro Corsair AX750 
CaseAudio
Rosewill Armor EVO hiFace+AudioGD+DT770Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #144 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by specopsFI View Post

No it didn't. Stop being a broken record and provide some proof if you still insist on commenting.

As for my own testing, 780 only needed 86MHz more than 290X (that is with the X) to comfortably beat it on average across 13 benchmarks.

Here's a very thorough testing showing a 780 @1163MHz (actual clock, not showing in the charts) being on average 2-4 % slower than a 290X @1130MHz:

http://img.fcenter.ru/imgmat/article/videocards/AMD_Radeon_R9_290X_4Gb/207186.png

It's safe to say that 100MHz is enough core clock advantage for the 780 to beat the 290X. A vanilla 290 will need to get within 60-70MHz of a 780 to match it.

relax, man. the 780 is still a fast card. can't go by those game benchmarks 'cause . . . who knows what got tweaked. i can give you synthetics if you want. maybe valley and heaven will go to 780. we'll see.

edit: look at the postings i contributed in your review thread. you seemed to have ignored them.
Second Intel Rig
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2700 4.5/ 1.28 77 290 (2) 16 / 1866 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1000 360/240 10 64 28 2160 
PowerCase
850 540 
  hide details  
Reply
Second Intel Rig
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2700 4.5/ 1.28 77 290 (2) 16 / 1866 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1000 360/240 10 64 28 2160 
PowerCase
850 540 
  hide details  
Reply
post #145 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdr09 View Post

relax, man. the 780 is still a fast card. can't go by those game benchmarks 'cause . . . who knows what got tweaked. i can give you synthetics if you want. maybe valley and heaven will go to 780. we'll see.

I'm not that much interested in single synthetic benchmark runs because who knows what got tweaked with them. What I'm interested in is overall gaming performance across a wide variety of games.

There is absolutely zero bias in my view in this matter. I've had way more AMD cards than Nvidia cards. For this GPU generation, I wanted to make absolutely sure I got the best enthusiast bang-for-buck choice. That was and is a competition between 290 and 780 and after testing both extensively, the 780 took it home. The 290 isn't far behind though and if one gets lucky with the OC potential, it might even pull ahead of an average 780. Average vs average, it's usually a narrow victory for the 780. Really high resolutions, CF and heavy BF4 emphasis are the exceptions IMHO.
Quote:
edit: look at the postings i contributed in your review thread. you seemed to have ignored them.

I didn't ignore them. They just didn't provide anything new beyond my own testing for the purpose I just described.
The Air Tunnel
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4820K (4500MHz@1.28V) P9X79 Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X New Edition Team Group Vulcan 4x4GB 2133MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
2x240GB SSD @RAID 0 Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 Windows 10 Pro Corsair AX750 
CaseAudio
Rosewill Armor EVO hiFace+AudioGD+DT770Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
The Air Tunnel
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4820K (4500MHz@1.28V) P9X79 Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X New Edition Team Group Vulcan 4x4GB 2133MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
2x240GB SSD @RAID 0 Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 Windows 10 Pro Corsair AX750 
CaseAudio
Rosewill Armor EVO hiFace+AudioGD+DT770Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #146 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by specopsFI View Post

I'm not that much interested in single synthetic benchmark runs because who knows what got tweaked with them. What I'm interested in is overall gaming performance across a wide variety of games.

There is absolutely zero bias in my view in this matter. I've had way more AMD cards than Nvidia cards. For this GPU generation, I wanted to make absolutely sure I got the best enthusiast bang-for-buck choice. That was and is a competition between 290 and 780 and after testing both extensively, the 780 took it home. The 290 isn't far behind though and if one gets lucky with the OC potential, it might even pull ahead of an average 780. Average vs average, it's usually a narrow victory for the 780. Really high resolutions, CF and heavy BF4 emphasis are the exceptions IMHO.
I didn't ignore them. They just didn't provide anything new beyond my own testing for the purpose I just described.

i beat your card, right? check them again.

is this what you got at 1180?




here is my 290 at 1175

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2516989
Edited by rdr09 - 4/6/14 at 5:04am
Second Intel Rig
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2700 4.5/ 1.28 77 290 (2) 16 / 1866 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1000 360/240 10 64 28 2160 
PowerCase
850 540 
  hide details  
Reply
Second Intel Rig
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2700 4.5/ 1.28 77 290 (2) 16 / 1866 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1000 360/240 10 64 28 2160 
PowerCase
850 540 
  hide details  
Reply
post #147 of 215
i beat your card, right? check them again.[/quote]

In a totally different environment, with no baseline data for comparison. Sorry, that means nothing. My testing was executed to the highest possible comparability and I stand by it 100%. The only thing that's changed since is the drivers, but I haven't seen anything to indicate a systematic progress for either camp. At least until the Geforce beta drivers about to be published, and even on that I'm actually quite skeptic.
The Air Tunnel
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4820K (4500MHz@1.28V) P9X79 Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X New Edition Team Group Vulcan 4x4GB 2133MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
2x240GB SSD @RAID 0 Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 Windows 10 Pro Corsair AX750 
CaseAudio
Rosewill Armor EVO hiFace+AudioGD+DT770Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
The Air Tunnel
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4820K (4500MHz@1.28V) P9X79 Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X New Edition Team Group Vulcan 4x4GB 2133MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
2x240GB SSD @RAID 0 Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 Windows 10 Pro Corsair AX750 
CaseAudio
Rosewill Armor EVO hiFace+AudioGD+DT770Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #148 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by specopsFI View Post

i beat your card, right? check them again.

In a totally different environment, with no baseline data for comparison. Sorry, that means nothing. My testing was executed to the highest possible comparability and I stand by it 100%. The only thing that's changed since is the drivers, but I haven't seen anything to indicate a systematic progress for either camp. At least until the Geforce beta drivers about to be published, and even on that I'm actually quite skeptic.[/quote]

you sure you're not bias? i'll admit - i am.
Second Intel Rig
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2700 4.5/ 1.28 77 290 (2) 16 / 1866 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1000 360/240 10 64 28 2160 
PowerCase
850 540 
  hide details  
Reply
Second Intel Rig
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2700 4.5/ 1.28 77 290 (2) 16 / 1866 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1000 360/240 10 64 28 2160 
PowerCase
850 540 
  hide details  
Reply
post #149 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdr09 View Post


you sure you're not bias? i'll admit - i am.

I'm sure my results are unbiased. As for my opinion, that surely is not since it is based on my personal preferences and needs, both of which I've stated in public.
The Air Tunnel
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4820K (4500MHz@1.28V) P9X79 Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X New Edition Team Group Vulcan 4x4GB 2133MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
2x240GB SSD @RAID 0 Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 Windows 10 Pro Corsair AX750 
CaseAudio
Rosewill Armor EVO hiFace+AudioGD+DT770Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
The Air Tunnel
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4820K (4500MHz@1.28V) P9X79 Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X New Edition Team Group Vulcan 4x4GB 2133MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
2x240GB SSD @RAID 0 Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 Windows 10 Pro Corsair AX750 
CaseAudio
Rosewill Armor EVO hiFace+AudioGD+DT770Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #150 of 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by specopsFI View Post

I'm sure my results are unbiased. As for my opinion, that surely is not since it is based on my personal preferences and needs, both of which I've stated in public.

look at your fs results. you barely beat my overall. and i have my SB with Ht off.

sorry op. last posts. enjoy your card(s).
Second Intel Rig
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2700 4.5/ 1.28 77 290 (2) 16 / 1866 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1000 360/240 10 64 28 2160 
PowerCase
850 540 
  hide details  
Reply
Second Intel Rig
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2700 4.5/ 1.28 77 290 (2) 16 / 1866 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1000 360/240 10 64 28 2160 
PowerCase
850 540 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Graphics Cards - General
Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › Graphics Cards - General › R9 290 or GTX 780??