390 the better card for longevity over 970?

[Final8ty]

So is it smart to get SLi or Crossfire, as an upgrade path? In my view any multi gpu setups have too many issues to be even considered as a good option, so as an upgrade path, I wouldn't even think its remotely good, a single card upgrade is better, you might end up spending more but you will have that single card longer than an old generation dual card setup, and once these cards go to EOL driver support for multi GPU will be on at the bottom of list for these companies.

My quadfire 5970s lasted from June 2010 to July 2013, 1.5 years into the 7 series and that's because i future proofed by getting 4GB versions 2GB per GPU, if i had bought the 2GB version 1GB per GPU i would of had to upgrade much much sooner and i would have used them for even longer if i had not abused them so much which lead to the Vram starting to die due to some heavy Ocing over the years and CF was still being supported and running great, 1.5 years into the 7 series which was well past EOL.

As for opinions of CF that is another matter for the individual and what that individual wants to achieve and the fact of the matter is if someone wants to make a CF setup last as long as possible then you get as much Vram as you can afford as many 5970+7970 1GB per GPU owners said they had to upgrade because the Vram not being enough in the long run.

 

[chrcoluk]

the 390 with more vram is more future proof on vram side.

But I would probably still buy the 970 as I tend to prefer nvidia.

Funny enough after getting my 1440p monitor I noticed my 970 feels weak now, when at 1050p it was fine.

If i had the cash I would get a 980ti but sadly I dont so I am planning to stick with my 970 for probably at least 2 years and just hope it holds out.

 

[razor1]

My quadfire 5970s lasted from June 2010 to July 2013, 1.5 years into the 7 series and that's because i future proofed by getting 4GB versions 2GB per GPU, if i had bought the 2GB version 1GB per GPU i would of had to upgrade much much sooner and i would have used them for even longer if i had not abused them so much which lead to the Vram starting to die due to some heavy Ocing over the years and CF was still being supported and running great, 1.5 years into the 7 series which was well past EOL.

As for opinions of CF that is another matter for the individual and what that individual wants to achieve and the fact of the matter is if someone wants to make a CF setup last as long as possible then you get as much Vram as you can afford as many 5970+7970 1GB per GPU owners said they had to upgrade because the Vram not being enough in the long run.

Yeah but what happened with the 6xxx series, how was their performance compared to the 5xxx series? Thats why your 5xxx series lasted longer actual GPU performance. The jump from the the 5xxx series to the 6xxx yielded very little performance for AMD and on nV going from gtx 4x0 to the gtx 5x0 was only like 20% right? We didn't get the normal 50% to 80% increase form one gen to another that time around.

 

[ebduncan]

Too many bruised ego's in this thread....

far too many keyboard warriors.

 

[atp1916]

^^ Note the arm brace.

But back on topic:
Pick the 390.

 

[Final8ty]

Yeah but what happened with the 6xxx series, how was their performance compared to the 5xxx series? Thats why your 5xxx series lasted longer actual GPU performance. The jump from the the 5xxx series to the 6xxx yielded very little performance for AMD and on nV going from gtx 4x0 to the gtx 5x0 was only like 20% right? We didn't get the normal 50% to 80% increase form one gen to another that time around.

It does not matter why you think why, the point is i like my Multi GPU setups to last as long as possible and i do whatever is in my power and that is to buy GPUs which with as much Vram as possible or with what im willing to pay for.


I have been playing at a minimum of 30" 2560x1600 since 2006 and CF support after AOL has never been an issue for any of my cards even when i was a year and a half into my 5970s my friends were still using 3870 CF each that i sold them and seeing as they are using much lower resolutions the Vram was not an issue and they only upgraded when the GPU grunt was becoming an issue as it should be besides DX features, but for me the Vram was becoming an issue with the 3870s as i was running 30" 2560x1600.

So the 4 series and the 5 series were leaps and bounds better than the 3 series and the 3 series was still getting CF support years into the 5 series, my friend is still using 5850s in CF but the grunt is becoming an issue and its still getting CF support and windows 10 drivers, so your theory of why is irrelevant based on my experience and my friends.

 

[razor1]

It does not matter why you think why, the point is i like my Multi GPU setups to last as long as possible and i do whatever is in my power and that is to buy GPUs which with as much Vram as possible or with what im willing to pay for.


I have been playing at a minimum of 30" 2560x1600 since 2006 and CF support after AOL has never been an issue for any of my cards even when i was a year and a half into my 5970s my friends were still using 3870 CF each that i sold them and seeing as they are using much lower resolutions the Vram was not an issue and they only upgraded when the GPU grunt was becoming an issue as it should be besides DX features, but for me the Vram was becoming an issue with the 3870s as i was running 30" 2560x1600.

So the 4 series and the 5 series were leaps and bounds better than the 3 series and the 3 series was still getting CF support years into the 5 series, my friend is still using 5850s in CF but the grunt is becoming an issue and its still getting CF support and windows 10 drivers, so your theory of why is irrelevant based on my experience and my friends.

I wasn't talking about the 3 or 4 series though, I was talking about the performance from 5 to 6 series and why the 5 series lasted as long as it did, so I don't know what your point is, doesn't make any sense when you start talking about prior series. CF support for performance is not on AMD's top priority for older generation cards. Have you been paying any attention to those PDF's? I can pull them up if you like?

anyways we are kinda OT.

 

[rabidz7]

Wow so you are making your round now huh. Just commented on another flaming post of yours. Just to help you out here, either card is built well. Ofcourse the 3.5gb Vram issue, or segmentation rather, could be argued but in real world use it will matter little. The 390 or any AMD card tend to be well built. Besides AMD doesn't really make them, the AIB partners do. HDMI2.0 may mean a lot to you but to many others it means precious little, and when I say others I mean a hell of a lot more than those that do care.

AMD builds the reference cards. The custom cards that AMD's AIBs make are better (matching nVidia reference), but they don't have top-end cards (compare to eVGA Classified, eVGA KPE). The 390 has more VRAM. The 970 has a much faster core. If you play at 4096x3072, 3840x2880, 3200x2400, 2560x1920, the 390 might be better due to the VRAM. But if you are at 2048x1536 or below, the 970 is superior.

 

[rabidz7]

the 390 with more vram is more future proof on vram side.

But I would probably still buy the 970 as I tend to prefer nvidia.

Funny enough after getting my 1440p monitor I noticed my 970 feels weak now, when at 1050p it was fine.

If i had the cash I would get a 980ti but sadly I dont so I am planning to stick with my 970 for probably at least 2 years and just hope it holds out.

OT, but I would switch back to 1680x1050. It isn't as high of a resolution, but 16:10 is nice. Maybe return the 2560x1440 thing and go 1920x1200.

 

[cageymaru]

AMD builds the reference cards. The custom cards that AMD's AIBs make are better (matching nVidia reference), but they don't have top-end cards (compare to eVGA Classified, eVGA KPE). The 390 has more VRAM. The 970 has a much faster core. If you play at 4096x3072, 3840x2880, 3200x2400, 2560x1920, the 390 might be better due to the VRAM. But if you are at 2048x1536 or below, the 970 is superior.

They both put up the same benchmark numbers in games @1080p. You can barely tell them apart. 970 starts to struggle @1440p in more demanding games than the 390 due to it's lower VRAM. Some of the newer games are starting to require more than 4GB of VRAM @1080p but Nvidia has worked hard to make this less of an issue.

Please stop making up fairy tales because people need real information about the cards; not fanboy exaggerations because you want to "win" an argument.

Here is what happens when the 970 gets stressed by a modern demanding game.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwfVnj0t8zc

 

[rabidz7]

They both put up the same benchmark numbers in games @1080p. You can barely tell them apart. 970 starts to struggle @1440p in more demanding games than the 390 due to it's lower VRAM. Some of the newer games are starting to require more than 4GB of VRAM @1080p but Nvidia has worked hard to make this less of an issue.

Please stop making up fairy tales because people need real information about the cards; not fanboy exaggerations because you want to "win" an argument.

Here is what happens when the 970 gets stressed by a modern demanding game.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwfVnj0t8zc

Here are some comparisons between a 970 and a R9-390, both at stock glocks:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1594?vs=1595

In that benchmark, the 970 performs similarly to the 390 at 1920x1080. At 2560x1440, the 390 takes a very slight advantage.
But there's one other factor... Overclock performance
Let's say that most 970s clock to 1470MHz and the 390s clock to 1150MHz. This means that the 970s will be 25% faster than stock. The 390s will only be 15% faster than stock. With that boost, the 970s take a slight advantage at 2560x1440 and the 970s destroy the 390s at 1920x1080.

When overclocked, the 970 is 15% faster than the 390 at 1920x1080. At 2560x1440, this drops to a 5% advantage.

 

[Final8ty]

I wasn't talking about the 3 or 4 series though, I was talking about the performance from 5 to 6 series and why the 5 series lasted as long as it did, so I don't know what your point is, doesn't make any sense when you start talking about prior series. CF support for performance is not on AMD's top priority for older generation cards. Have you been paying any attention to those PDF's? I can pull them up if you like?

anyways we are kinda OT.

The point is the 3 or 4 series lasted just as long so you trying to claim that the 5 series lasted as long as it did because of the 6 series does not stack up, so it made perfect sense to bring them up.

It does not matter if its not a priority the fact is that it works and works well even after AOL, there has never been a situation that a newer gen gets CF for a game where the older gen did not that's still getting the current driver updates.

 

[Final8ty]

They both put up the same benchmark numbers in games @1080p. You can barely tell them apart. 970 starts to struggle @1440p in more demanding games than the 390 due to it's lower VRAM. Some of the newer games are starting to require more than 4GB of VRAM @1080p but Nvidia has worked hard to make this less of an issue.

Please stop making up fairy tales because people need real information about the cards; not fanboy exaggerations because you want to "win" an argument.

Here is what happens when the 970 gets stressed by a modern demanding game.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwfVnj0t8zc

Man the 970 image is really washed out which is easy to see in the race forest section onwards.

 

[razor1]

The point is the 3 or 4 series lasted just as long so you trying to claim that the 5 series lasted as long as it did because of the 6 series does not stack up, so it made perfect sense to bring them up.

It does not matter if its not a priority the fact is that it works and works well even after AOL, there has never been a situation that a newer gen gets CF for a game where the older gen did not that's still getting the current driver updates.

CF support and CF optimization are two different things, making a profile isn't hard, people have been making profiles with nV hardware for SLi without nV's involvement. Just that AMD doesn't allow you to do that, and I don't think they still do.

The 3 series sucked, it didn't last very long at all, two top end 3 series barely matched the g80. AMD after the r600 chip was released went with a small die approach because they had nothing planned that would have competed with in a big die situation. Again you are taking things without looking at what was going on that created that situation. By doing so, nV didn't need to push the envelope much either because they could get away with it.

 

[Final8ty]

CF support and CF optimization are two different things, making a profile isn't hard, people have been making profiles with nV hardware for SLi without nV's involvement.

The 3 series sucked, it didn't last very long at all, two top end 3 series barely matched the g80. AMD after the r600 chip was released went with a small die approach because they had nothing planned that would have competed with in a big die situation. Again you are taking things without looking at what was going on that created that situation. By doing so, nV didn't need to push the envelope much either because they could get away with it.

The problem with you is you always change the point, i said nothing about optimization i said support and nothing else and as long as it works well then that's all that matters and it did.

And again you are changing the point i said to make multi GPU last a long as possible which is in the users power and nothing else, i said nothing about they would not be out performed by other or newer cards.

 

[atp1916]

This thread needs to be closed.

Pretty sure the OP had enough material to go off of by the 3rd page.

 

[razor1]

The problem with you is you always change the point, i said nothing about optimization i said support and nothing else and as long as it works well then that's all that matters and it did.

And again you are changing the point i said to make multi GPU last a long as possible which is in the users power and nothing else, i said nothing about they would not be out performed by other or newer cards.

You didn't but I did, and this is why I didn't talk about multi gpu after you clarified it was a person preference.

And you were the one that brought other cards prior to what we were talking about which you started that off, and I clarified the reasons what you saw and why we saw it based on generational performance differences. At that point I shouldn't have even need to clarify it because you bought the cards, you probably did your research and noticed that games weren't pushing the bounds that much. Come to think of it, outside of 2 games/ series from that time, Crysis series and Witcher I don't remember any games that really pushed graphics cards around the g80 (r600), to 6 series, gtx 580.

 

[n=1]

AMD builds the reference cards. The custom cards that AMD's AIBs make are better (matching nVidia reference), but they don't have top-end cards (compare to eVGA Classified, eVGA KPE). The 390 has more VRAM. The 970 has a much faster core. If you play at 4096x3072, 3840x2880, 3200x2400, 2560x1920, the 390 might be better due to the VRAM. But if you are at 2048x1536 or below, the 970 is superior.

Have you heard of MSI Lightning? Arguably it's MSI's Kingpin card, and yes they do make Lightning cards for AMD GPUs.

 

[Deathroned]

flame mode on. Op get the 390 imho the 970 I would not touch that with a dead rat tied to a twig, and nvidia will nerf your drivers whilst amd will keep improving your drivers e.g. The amd radeon 390x can compete with the 980ti in the proper environment.

 

[razor1]

flame mode on. Op get the 390 imho the 970 I would not touch that with a dead rat tied to a twig, and nvidia will nerf your drivers whilst amd will keep improving your drivers e.g. The amd radeon 390x can compete with the 980ti in the proper environment.

LOL I think you mean Flame ON! any case pointless. either card is good, its up to the OP to decide what suits his needs, still would get a 290 over the 390 all based on price of course.

 

[Final8ty]

You didn't but I did, and this is why I didn't talk about multi gpu after you clarified it was a person preference.

And you were the one that brought other cards prior to what we were talking about which you started that off, and I clarified the reasons what you saw and why we saw it based on generational performance differences. At that point I shouldn't have even need to clarify it because you bought the cards, you probably did your research and noticed that games weren't pushing the bounds that much. Come to think of it, outside of 2 games/ series from that time, Crysis series and Witcher I don't remember any games that really pushed graphics cards around the g80 (r600), to 6 series, gtx 580.

And that is the biggest issue with you, you dont stick to the point and me bringing in other cards which i had was to counter your reasons for which you thought that the 5 series had support for so long when in fact your reasoning was not the case because the other cards lasted just as long with acceptable performance.

Your theory of why was wrong period, and we are done.

 

[razor1]

And that is the biggest issue with you, you dont stick to the point and me bring in other cards which i had was to counter your reasons for which you thought that the 5 series had support for so long when in fact your reasoning was not the case because the other cards lasted just as long with acceptable performance.

Your theory of why was wrong period, and we are done.

So what you are saying is I shouldn't say anything to counter what you post? Oh I see, you can't have a conversation that might have more than one side than? yeah you know what that is called in psychology? Go back to what ever rock you crawled out of because that isn't going to fly here.

 

[Final8ty]

So what you are saying is I shouldn't say anything to counter what you post? Oh I see, you can't have a conversation that might have more than one side than? yeah you know what that is called in physiology?

I have no issue with you trying to counter my posts the issue is that you change the point when your counter fails. bye

 

[razor1]

I have no issue with you trying to counter my posts the issue is that you change the point when your counter fails. bye

well that's your point of view, but I can tell you, you try to say something and bring other cards into the picture, you better know what happened around those times when those cards were released to make a point, because if you don't you don't know what you are talking about. Just throwing names out there doesn't show us anything. Its like saying 1+1 = 0. If no one says no, it will be equal to 0.

I have also stated the g80 is one of the few cards that lasted 3 generations guess what time frame you had your 5xxx series, about 3 years after the g80? do they coincide sure they do.

 

[Final8ty]

well that's your point of view, but I can tell you, you try to say something and bring other cards into the picture, you better know what happened around those times when those cards were released to make a point,

None of your reasons why matter, that fact is they did last for whatever reason and all of your waffle will not change that.

.yes/no and why are 2 totally separate questions and no one asked you for the why.

 

[razor1]

None of the your reasons why matter , that fact is they did last and all of your waffle will not change that.

well your reasons don't matter either because you can't see anything other then your own. Yes turning a blind eye to information that is out there which is easy to see, is a great way to go through life good luck.

 

[Final8ty]

well your reasons don't matter either because you can't see anything other then your own. Yes turning a blind eye to information that is out there which is easy to see, is a great way to go through life good luck.

I dont need your information as it was not needed, you have to learn when its needed and when its not as i said its down to what the individual wants to achieve and whether they care about why or not on a particular point and aspect and you are incapable of seeing the difference and you would have hard time in court with yes/no or why because you think they all must go together when they dont.

 

[razor1]

I dont need your information as it was not needed, you have to learn when its needed and when its not as i said its down to what the individual wants to achieve and whether they care about why or not on a particular point and aspect and you are incapable of seeing the difference and you would have hard time in court with yes/no or why because you think they all must go together when they dont.

Well your information isn't needed either then lol. See how this conversation goes? I don't need your information as you don't need mine, you have to learn when your information is needed too.

Pretty erroneous argument what you couldn't come up with a better excuse?

 

[Final8ty]

Well your information isn't needed either then lol. See how this conversation goes? I don't need your information as you don't need mine, you have to learn when your information is needed too.

Pretty erroneous argument what you couldn't come up with a better excuse?

I gave me and my friends experience which goings against your claims of CF not lasting past AOL and Vram not becoming an issue before GPU grunt in Multi GPU, and then you come with a string of but but but in reply which changes nothing about me and my friends experience because you just can not accept being wrong, so you shift the points.

And now you can have the last word because that seems really important to you.

 

[razor1]

I gave me and my friends experience which goings against your claims of CF not lasting past AOL and Vram not becoming an issue before GPU grunt in Multi GPU, and then you come with a string of but but but in reply which changes nothing about me and my friends experience because you just can not accept being wrong, so you shift the points.

Ok explain to me why the g80 lasted 3 gens then? And then think of why the cards you and your friends have lasted less time (keep this in mind because I am pretty sure you are going to screw this up *time*), and you had to go with 2 cards not a single?

I don't need the last word but if you go down that road that information isn't not need then I will continue where you left off with sarcastic and useless remarks, just like yours.

 

[ebduncan]

you two are silly, stop your bickering.

 

[Final8ty]

you two are silly, stop your bickering.

Im done with him as its Its about a multi GPU set up lasting as long as possible and nothing to do with single cards or that other cards can out perform them as he thinks the point is being the fastest setup as long as possible when it was not..
He is now on my ignore list when is an honour as he is the only one on there.

 

[razor1]

Im done with him as its Its about a multi GPU set up lasting as long as possible and nothing to do with single cards or that other cards can out perform them as he thinks the point is being the fastest setup as long as possible when it was not..
He is now on my ignore list when is an honour as he is the only one on there.

Good, I am happy, that way you won't comment on anything I post lol.

Of course you won't answer what I stated because your entire fuckin statement will come down.

 

[chrcoluk]

OT, but I would switch back to 1680x1050. It isn't as high of a resolution, but 16:10 is nice. Maybe return the 2560x1440 thing and go 1920x1200.

I have been experimenting different options on games that it cannot cope with.

One option is to play at 1200p with 1:1 pixel mapping, the screen area is almost same size as my 1050p monitor.

I also have been trying full screen at lower resolutions to see if I consider the scaling acceptable. So I am keeping the monitor, there is options open to me if I need to use them.

 

[cageymaru]

Im done with him as its Its about a multi GPU set up lasting as long as possible and nothing to do with single cards or that other cards can out perform them as he thinks the point is being the fastest setup as long as possible when it was not..
He is now on my ignore list when is an honour as he is the only one on there.

Ha ha don't worry man. He made my ignore list long ago along with Prime, facetious; err factum, and a couple others. You'll notice that when you tune out the white noise that everyone else seems a lot more pleasant to chat with. I like people that don't agree with my point of view as much as I like the ones that see it my way.

 

[Derfnofred]

^ do you guys actually read what they write? It seemed pretty cogent to me. (and then the bickering continued for another 110 posts...)

 

[JustReason]

The problem at times is that either someone doesn't actually read your post or cant comprehend then assume what you meant, and there by misconstrue your original point. Take this discussion of Multi GPUs. One started to debate that getting enough horse power by running dual cards can help make the setup last for years. Never mentioned how it performed against current release cards. But then the counter point was being made using performance of current release cards over older dual cards which really was not in line with the original point.

It gets frustrating after a while when then the distracter just keeps arguing that point when you have even gone so far as to explain what you meant and how they have misunderstood your stance. Or as the case generally is they refuse to directly counter your point when you mention they still have yet to refute it. Side stepping is getting huge in forums.

I like getting counter points as long as they are in line with my original point. I don't claim to know everything, so getting information is paramount to why I join these forums. Unfortunately it seems civil debate has been pushed aside for all out war.

 

[rabidz7]

Have you heard of MSI Lightning? Arguably it's MSI's Kingpin card, and yes they do make Lightning cards for AMD GPUs.

Those things take forever to come out and often aren't made for a generation. There isn't yet a Fury X Lightning but the 980 Classi was out within a month, IIRC.

 

[razor1]

The problem at times is that either someone doesn't actually read your post or cant comprehend then assume what you meant, and there by misconstrue your original point. Take this discussion of Multi GPUs. One started to debate that getting enough horse power by running dual cards can help make the setup last for years. Never mentioned how it performed against current release cards. But then the counter point was being made using performance of current release cards over older dual cards which really was not in line with the original point.

It gets frustrating after a while when then the distracter just keeps arguing that point when you have even gone so far as to explain what you meant and how they have misunderstood your stance. Or as the case generally is they refuse to directly counter your point when you mention they still have yet to refute it. Side stepping is getting huge in forums.

I like getting counter points as long as they are in line with my original point. I don't claim to know everything, so getting information is paramount to why I join these forums. Unfortunately it seems civil debate has been pushed aside for all out war.

That wasn't what the discussion was about, Noko stated it can be a upgrade path by buying a second card for multi GPU, where you will need more memory, I stated probably not, AA and AF will not affect memory consumption as dual cards can split the work and memory resources for this. If the game is already tasking memory wise in single card config dual cards will not help.

The discussion was mainly about memory, and F man over there, came out with some crap about multi cards for his friends talking about all sorts of different generations, which I countered.

We were talking civilly till F man again, goes in and says it doesn't matter what I posted it will never be relevant, A person that states things like that instead of the points at hand is a person that doesn't want to discuss anything, just random crap that is thrown around like feces.

 

[Final8ty]

The problem at times is that either someone doesn't actually read your post or cant comprehend then assume what you meant, and there by misconstrue your original point. Take this discussion of Multi GPUs. One started to debate that getting enough horse power by running dual cards can help make the setup last for years. Never mentioned how it performed against current release cards. But then the counter point was being made using performance of current release cards over older dual cards which really was not in line with the original point.

It gets frustrating after a while when then the distracter just keeps arguing that point when you have even gone so far as to explain what you meant and how they have misunderstood your stance. Or as the case generally is they refuse to directly counter your point when you mention they still have yet to refute it. Side stepping is getting huge in forums.

I like getting counter points as long as they are in line with my original point. I don't claim to know everything, so getting information is paramount to why I join these forums. Unfortunately it seems civil debate has been pushed aside for all out war.

Indeed many people like to use what they got for as long as possible we are not all interested in chasing the latest and greatest, we get the best possible at the time and use it for as long as its meeting our needs and not oh something faster has come out quick dump what i have even though it still giving me what i want which is 60fps, of course there is a case for new features and DX support but seeing the adoption rate is so slow and there is very little difference in look for quite some time, the urge to upgrade because of features is really not a priority for me and my friends.

I normally run 3 or 4 cards i have only ran 2 cards once and that was with the 1900xt.