Replacement for GTX 970

[ginfest]

Just s/w Microcenter, they will refund full price for my 4 month old MSI GTX970 Gaming. The question is what to replace it with? The 290X are all in the price range or cheaper but it seems from current benchmarks I'll be losing quite a bit of performance, never mind features. It's either that or pay +$200.00 for a 980!
Got 24 hours to decide before I can get to the store.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

I'd get the 290x and save up for the next round of cards coming soon if I was in that spot.

 

[3DVagabond]

I'd get the 290x and save up for the next round of cards coming soon if I was in that spot.

Agree with this^ ~100w more power usage though, unless that doesn't concern you.

 

[jackstar7]

Just s/w Microcenter, they will refund full price for my 4 month old MSI GTX970 Gaming. The question is what to replace it with? The 290X are all in the price range or cheaper but it seems from current benchmarks I'll be losing quite a bit of performance, never mind features. It's either that or pay +$200.00 for a 980!
Got 24 hours to decide before I can get to the store.

What games are you playing where you'll lose quite a bit of performance going from a 970 to a 290x?

 

[MeldarthX]

290X losing a lot to 970? Nope; they are about equal at 1080p; 290X win some and loses some; 290X starts to pull away at 1440; and no contest at 4k. 290X is ave 10% than 980 now.....

I picked up 290 for 199....its a beast of a card and I'll wait to see what comes next

 

[Sunaiac]

J it seems from current benchmarks I'll be losing quite a bit of performance

Wut ???

 

[007ELmO]

380x/390x taking way too long to come out

 

[UaVaj]

380x/390x taking way too long to come out

why wait for next generation, when you can be gaming now.

1080 x3 will definitely need that higher ROP count. 290x x3 will power it nicely.

otoh if you want to give nvidia more $$$$. 980 x3 will also do fine.

 

[2is]

When next gen is on the verge of release, it makes sense to wait.

 

[Enigmoid]

Just s/w Microcenter, they will refund full price for my 4 month old MSI GTX970 Gaming. The question is what to replace it with? The 290X are all in the price range or cheaper but it seems from current benchmarks I'll be losing quite a bit of performance, never mind features. It's either that or pay +$200.00 for a 980!
Got 24 hours to decide before I can get to the store.

Is it causing problems or do you expect it to cause problems with regards to 4 GB Vram in the near future?

You can get an exchange but the 980 is a good deal more expensive and the 290x performs pretty much the same, has 4 GB but much higher power consumption. Buying either of those cards locks you in.

If you won't experience problems with 3.5 GB and will upgrade when the 390x/GM200 come out then I would suggest just keeping it and not bothering with the exchange.

If you are looking for longevity and the 0.5 GB is important then a 290x is your best bet.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

980 x3 will also do fine.

It's good to know you're not using logic. When many games don't even have SLI/CF profiles, you're recommending people to drop at least $1650 on graphics cards alone. Where most games it won't work past 1... Scaling past 2 cards in games that support it are awful with these high end cards.

 

[Subyman]

Do you have a reason to trade back the 970 other than principle? I don't mean to sound like a butt, I am genuinely curious.

 

[2is]

It's good to know you're not using logic. When many games don't even have SLI/CF profiles, you're recommending people to drop at least $1650 on graphics cards alone. Where most games it won't work past 1... Scaling past 2 cards in games that support it are awful with these high end cards.

If by "most games" you are also including indie games, that the majority of whom will play just fine on a single card anyway, I suppose you're right. If we are talking about AAA games, most games support SLI just fine. In fact, every single game I play works with SLI, some better than others.

It sounds to me like your AMD fanboyism got mad that someone recommended an NVidia card.

Warning issued for personal attack.
-- stahlhart

 

[TurtleCrusher]

If by "most games" you are also including indie games, that the majority of whom will play just fine on a single card anyway, I suppose you're right. If we are talking about AAA games, most games support SLI just fine. In fact, every single game I play works with SLI, some better than others.

It sounds to me like your AMD fanboyism got mad that someone recommended an NVidia card. I noticed you made no mention of the AMD cards he recommended. What's more interesting is Crossfire has far worse support than SLI on top of it. Yet, you felt like that wasn't important enough to criticize.

You do realize three 980s is $920 more than three 290s? It has zero to do with brand brand. That's $920, which is more than what I spend each month on my house. If someone going to be an idiot for buying three video cards (or two higher end for that matter), for the money one is clearly a better choice than the other. Unless money is no object. In that case spend away.

What's more interesting is Crossfire has far worse support than SLI on top of it. Yet, you felt like that wasn't important enough to criticize.

Hmm... weird, right?

When many games don't even have SLI/CF profiles

 

[jackstar7]

Principle is a fine reason to get a refund. If the market accepts poor customer treatment, then the market is not doing its job to punish poor business practices.

 

[poohbear]

Principle is a fine reason to get a refund. If the market accepts poor customer treatment, then the market is not doing its job to punish poor business practices.

U do realize the gtx 970 has 4gb of BRAM right? yes, 4 GB just for the gtx 970. Yes, the last 500mb operate @ a different speed, but that's still VRAM which is way faster than system RAM. Does your system notice a difference between 8gb of 1600mhz DDR3 & 8gb of 2333mhz DDR3? Aside from bencmarks, no , cause its all system RAM! The most importang thing is it has access to 8gb of system RAM, speed has minimal impact on day to day performance on any modern system.

This is especially true depending on how a program/OS allocates memory usage.

 

[2is]

U do realize the gtx 970 has 4gb of BRAM right? yes, 4 GB just for the gtx 970. Yes, the last 500mb operate @ a different speed, but that's still VRAM which is way faster than system RAM. Does your system notice a difference between 8gb of 1600mhz DDR3 & 8gb of 2333mhz DDR3? Aside from bencmarks, no , cause its all system RAM! The most importang thing is it has access to 8gb of system RAM, speed has minimal impact on day to day performance on any modern system.

This is especially true depending on how a program/OS allocates memory usage.

Except VRAM isn't the only deceiving/dishonest spec about the 970

 

[iiiankiii]

U do realize the gtx 970 has 4gb of BRAM right? yes, 4 GB just for the gtx 970. Yes, the last 500mb operate @ a different speed, but that's still VRAM which is way faster than system RAM. Does your system notice a difference between 8gb of 1600mhz DDR3 & 8gb of 2333mhz DDR3? Aside from bencmarks, no , cause its all system RAM! The most importang thing is it has access to 8gb of system RAM, speed has minimal impact on day to day performance on any modern system.

This is especially true depending on how a program/OS allocates memory usage.

There is a HUGE difference in performance between the last 0.5GB and the 3.5GB. HUGE. 1/8 of the speed is a pretty big drop in performance. It's just that Nvidia is trying its best to prevent access to that much, much slower 0.5GB RAM. In fact, dual channel DDR3 at 2333mhz (37 GB/s) is faster than the last 0.5GB ( 28 GB/s) of the 970. That's how slow it is.

Not going to debate about having 4GB. Yes, it's there; just not equal.

 

[Dribble]

Performance is still exactly the same as it has been in every review since the card came out. If you were happy with that performance then no reason to change keep the card as it's probably still the best card for you. Just buy AMD next time if you feel that upset with nvidia.

 

[showb1z]

It's gone a long way when people are questioning customers who aren't satisfied about a product the manufacturer blatantly lied about and return it.
For the billionth time: it's not the performance today people are worried about, it's the performance tomorrow. The lack of VRAM (the last 0.5GB might as well not be there) will have an impact on performance.

If you have a spare card I'd just wait for the 390 to drop. That's what I'm going if I ever get the not so knowledgeable people at Amazon.de to understand the issue.

 

[UaVaj]

Performance is still exactly the same as it has been in every review since the card came out. If you were happy with that performance then no reason to change keep the card as it's probably still the best card for you. Just buy AMD next time if you feel that upset with nvidia.

that would be the rational thing to do. :thumbsup::thumbsup:

however the emotional anger of being deceive is too much to bear and the thinking has become irrational and return for full refund is the end to the mean. consumer power to the max.

now what to replace it with ?????

how about another 970? it is still the best gpu overall. at least with round 2. no surprises. :biggrin:

 

[guskline]

I sent back the Gigabyte GTX 970 gamer I bought on 1/4/15 and replaced it with a Sapphire Tri-X OC R9 290. Though not quite the same in benchmarks, I don't notice much difference in the games I play AND saved @$80. I also have two of these Sapphires running in CF in my main rig below so I was familiar with their performance.

 

[soccerballtux]

I'm sure someone will come up with a software patch to disable the 512MB of VRAM. I would just take that. The lower CPU load on the Nvidia card will be nice.

 

[soccerballtux]

There is a HUGE difference in performance between the last 0.5GB and the 3.5GB. HUGE. 1/8 of the speed is a pretty big drop in performance. It's just that Nvidia is trying its best to prevent access to that much, much slower 0.5GB RAM. In fact, dual channel DDR3 at 2333mhz (37 GB/s) is faster than the last 0.5GB ( 28 GB/s) of the 970. That's how slow it is.

Not going to debate about having 4GB. Yes, it's there; just not equal.

what about the latency? gotta push it through the PCIE pipe.

I personally don't sweat about 512MB. Maybe I can upgrade for cheap because people dumping them on forums and ebay.

 

[Techhog]

If by "most games" you are also including indie games, that the majority of whom will play just fine on a single card anyway, I suppose you're right. If we are talking about AAA games, most games support SLI just fine. In fact, every single game I play works with SLI, some better than others.

It sounds to me like your AMD fanboyism got mad that someone recommended an NVidia card.

Gotta love when the fanboy card is pulled out of nowhere, especially since it's almost always a fanboy who does it!

Seriously, 3 cards (of either brand) is almost never worth it no matter what you play, since the scaling sucks at that point. Performance even degrades in some games! You need a lot of disposable income or to simply want to say that you have 3 cards to justify it.