[ VideoCardz ] NVIDIA launches GeForce GTX 960

[RussianSensation]

TPU shows the 960 about even with a 7950 at 4K...

HD7950 costs $140 vs. $200 for a 960. So a 960 is worth it over a $140 7950 now? You made no point because if you say that 960 is worth it over the 7950 for $60 more, then R9 290 is automatically worth it for $40-60 more with 40-50% more performance. :sneaky:

To him, all that matters is price/performance. Nothing else. Once you realize this, you learn to ignore the walls and move on...

That's funny because my post clearly addressed the double standard of TPU in regards to noise levels. But go ahead and crap all over price/performance. I guess it doesn't matter in the GPU world, not at all. :thumbsup:

You are too predictable, justifying a 960 over a 7950 that costs $60 less and downplaying how amazing the R9 290 is for $40-60 more over the R9 290 because of power consumption for the OEM market, which has nothing to do with the DIY market AT forums deal with.

It's pretty amazing how some of you can't even accept when NV's card is clearly garbage for the DIY market, and in defense goal posts are shifted to defend the precious brand at all costs. When 970 came out, price/performance and 4GB of VRAM over 780Ti mattered, and now with the 960 price/performance, double the VRAM and 40-50% more performance for $50 on a 290 don't matter anymore. Got it. I'll note this down when you start making posts about 6GB GM200 vs. 4GB for the 390X.

 

[RussianSensation]

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with putting the blinders on and focusing on only price/performance, but he must also realize not everyone is the same way.

Did you read my post? Why in one review does TPU give 980 G1 9.7 with 43dBA noise levels but he criticizes R9 290 cards for being hot and loud when Sapphire Tri-X runs at 69-72C at 37 dBA noise level? Maybe you should address how this is inconsistent in TPU's 960 review, where he unfairly criticizes AMD's 290 temperature and noise levels, despite noting that it's the price/performance and performance leader for not much more $. Is this acceptable to you and it's a problem that I pointed this information? I am all about consistency and clearly here TPU is bending their own judgement to cover up for the horrible price/performance and its lack of VRAM. Had they been honest with the reader, they wouldn't be able to "sell us" on the idea of why the 960 is such a "good buy".

Secondly, you yourself noted how 4GB of VRAM might be a limitation for 4K gaming but yet you mention no such thing for 2GB at 1080P. Essentially you have foresight to predict increased VRAM usage at high resolution for 4K gaming, but have no foresight to expect that VRAM demands will grow beyond 2GB at 1080P, despite games like Shadow of Mordor and Watch Dogs already running better with > 2GB of VRAM at 1080P? Who is putting blinders on? It's definitely not me.

I guess you totally missed this in the Shadow of Mordor benchmarks. You don't think it's alarming that a 960 2GB performs so poorly in this game which we know is heavily VRAM bottlenecked? What about future 2015-2016 PC games at 1080P?

Oh, and about power usage. 960 uses 121W of power vs. 149W for the 7950, but it has 2GB of VRAM and costs 43% more. What's your response to that? Are you going to tell us now that a 300W OEM PSU can provide enough power for a 121W card but will blow up with 30W more load?

A junky 300W PSU wouldn't work with either of those cards, while a high quality 300W OEM PSU will support both 120 and 150W.

But since you can't run a videocard without the rest of the components, are you telling me a cheap 300W OEM PSU can handle 230-240W of system load in games which is what a 960 with an i5/i7 produces? Several of you presented these arguments that OEMs will love the 960 because they could use cheap PSUs to power it. NO cheap 300W PSU will be able to sustain 76-80% load.

 

[96Firebird]

TPU didn't have a 280, so I referenced the 7950. Look at what I was quoting, connect the dots. I have faith that you can do that...

Also, learn how the decibel system works. You are complaining because of 980's 43db compared to 290's 49db? That doesn't mean the 290 is only 12% louder...

Ok, now you're saying that he criticized the Sapphire 290X's acoustics? He didn't, I just found the article and read it, since you didn't link it. So throw that accusation out the window.

Then again, this is way off-topic. Per usual when it comes to your posts.

And now you are claiming we only cater to DIY users? People don't come here with pre-built systems wanting to upgrade? Should we just ignore them, call them peasants? Tell them to upgrade their PSU along with the video card, even if it isn't necessary?

 

[AtenRa]

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with putting the blinders on and focusing on only price/performance, but he must also realize not everyone is the same way.

Very true,

Personally i am amazed by what NV have managed to do with 28nm. Having the same performance as the GTX680 but with 128-bit and less power using the same 28nm process is a big accomplishment.
But i also believe as many others, that $200 for that card is too much.

 

[skipsneeky2]

I have been laughing my ass off so hard for the last 30 minutes just sitting here hitting that f5 .I knew this would be funny but wow my sides hurt.

I guess what is going on in here is absolutely more funny then"That 70's show"that my wife right now is watching.Shes asking whats so funny and i just don't know how to respond lmfao.

 

[Attic]

Did you read my post? Why in one review does TPU give 980 G1 9.7 with 43dBA noise levels but he criticizes R9 290 cards for being hot and loud when Sapphire Tri-X runs at 69-72C at 37 dBA noise level? Maybe you should address how this is inconsistent in TPU's 960 review, where he unfairly criticizes AMD's 290 temperature and noise levels, despite noting that it's the price/performance and performance leader for not much more $. Is this acceptable to you and it's a problem that I pointed this information? I am all about consistency and clearly here TPU is bending their own judgement to cover up for the horrible price/performance and its lack of VRAM. Had they been honest with the reader, they wouldn't be able to "sell us" on the idea of why the 960 is such a "good buy".

Secondly, you yourself noted how 4GB of VRAM might be a limitation for 4K gaming but yet you mention no such thing for 2GB at 1080P. Essentially you have foresight to predict increased VRAM usage at high resolution for 4K gaming, but have no foresight to expect that VRAM demands will grow beyond 2GB at 1080P, despite games like Shadow of Mordor and Watch Dogs already running better with > 2GB of VRAM at 1080P? Who is putting blinders on? It's definitely not me.

I guess you totally missed this in the Shadow of Mordor benchmarks.

Oh, and about power usage. 960 uses 121W of power vs. 149W for the 7950, but it has 2GB of VRAM and costs 43% more. What's your response to that? Are you going to tell us now that a 300W OEM PSU can provide enough power for a 121W card but will blow up with 30W more load?

A junky 300W PSU wouldn't work with either of those cards, while a high quality 300W OEM PSU will support both 120 and 150W.

But since you can't run a videocard without the rest of the components, are you telling me a cheap 300W OEM PSU can handle 230-240W of system load in games which is what a 960 with an i5/i7 produces? Several of you presented these arguments that OEMs will love the 960 because they could use cheap PSUs to power it. NO cheap 300W PSU will be able to sustain 76-80% load.

All this lays it out pretty well.


Review sites are going to have to bend themselves in knots to make the 960 look good. Lately this shtick from reviewers has been standard, these review sites are incentivized to move GPU's IMO.

 

[RussianSensation]

TPU didn't have a 280, so I referenced the 7950. Look at what I was quoting, connect the dots. I have faith that you can do that...

What's your point? R9 280 is $150 and HD7950 is $140 on Newegg.

Also, learn how the decibel system works. You are complaining because of 980's 43db compared to 290's 49db? That doesn't mean the 290 is only 12% louder...

Did I compare 980's 43dB to 290's reference? Clearly you are putting words in my mouth.

Ok, now you're saying that he criticized the Sapphire 290X's acoustics? He didn't, I just found the article and read it, since you didn't link it. So throw that accusation out the window.

He clearly said in his 960 review the following:

"The current price/performance king is the R9 290, which, at $270, isn't completely out of reach either. However, the integral difference to me and a ton of users is that NVIDIA's new GTX 960 is so very power efficient, which makes it run much cooler and quieter than AMD's cards."

I provided a counter-example to his claim where an after-market R9 290 runs cool and quiet. Therefore, his statement is either too limited to specific reference cards or he is intentionally not discussing the existence of after-market R9 290 cards. In effect, it makes 960 look cooler and quieter than it really is, negating the point in his review. I pointed this out. It's a valid criticism.

Then again, this is way off-topic. Per usual when it comes to your posts.

Everything I posted is on-topic.

1. I addressed price/performance
2. I addressed power usage
3. I addressed temperatures
4. I addressed VRAM
5. I addressed absolute performance

You provided no valid counter-arguments against my points, instead calling my posts off-topic. That's not a valid response, sorry.

And now you are claiming we only cater to DIY users? People don't come here with pre-built systems wanting to upgrade? Should we just ignore them, call them peasants? Tell them to upgrade their PSU along with the video card, even if it isn't necessary?

The primary target market of AT sub-forum like ours is definitely not OEMs/wholesalers and pre-built system builders. You focusing on OEMs is just a cop out for ignoring all my points as they relate to the DIY market.

Even when members come and ask for advice for pre-built / OEM systems, in times like those we provide advice like get a $5 PSU adapter for your 450W PSU to run a 280X/290X, you know that one time when someone like that asked for advice and you couldn't even provide that answer! Even when people proved to you with professional reviews that his PSU was rated far above his wattage, you refused to believe facts and continued to repeat your opinion. According to you, we should take away that pre-built systems don't have upgradable PSUs, and PSU adapters don't come with videocards and can't be bought! I learned a lot today. You continue to derail my questions/comments instead of addressing my points directly:

You also failed to justify your position how a crappy OEM PSU would be able to power a 960 but not a 7950, didn't address my point on VRAM, nor price/performance, not spending a bit more for longevity with a 960 vs. 290. In other words, you disregarded ALL my points since well you have no solid argument to present. Instead you ended your point about OEMs vs. DIY.

What positive can be said for 960 besides perf/watt and lower power usage against an R9 290?

You ignored price/performance of R9 290 - check
You ignored VRAM advantage for IQ in games - check
You ignored longevity of a card for someone wanting to keep his card for more than 2 years - check
You ignored the massive performance difference at 1080P - check
You ignored that even a crappy PSU would be overwhelmed by a 960 + i5 while 500W PSU can easily be found for $50 on Newegg and will last 5-10 years - check
You even diverted attention to a reference R9 290 when no one even discussed it (implying as if $240-260 after-market R9 290s do not exit) - check

When 960 gets mopped up in future titles at 1080P by an after-market 290, and the 960 is forced to use medium textures because you thought it was a good idea to save $40-60 for a new purchase, I'll just tell you - I told you so!

However, I am not here to sell you a 960 or a 290> I just want to present fair and square information to new PC DIYers that are entering our hobby. In my opinion, providing this information out there is doing them a service. If they compare the data, and choose a 960, no problem. The last thing we want to do on this forum is to hide disadvantages of a certain product from public because it's doing a disservice for us to be impartial as a forum. I do not get $ for promoting NV or AMD cards but I'll criticize things I think warrant criticism - just like I ripped apart reference 7970/290 blowers or 5800 series poor tessellation for anyone who wanted to keep them for longer to enjoy tessellation in DX11 games.
^

That, and it's a great straw man to use for posters seeking to divert attention away from less desireable comparisons when they irrationally favor one brand over another; (e.g. to distract discussion onto meager differences in power consumption in order to prevent discussion about performance per dollar or max performance at a given price point)

 

[nitromullet]

But what's more important than price/performance? Especially when Nvidia isn't offering a game with the card?

Price/performance is definitely up there, but you have to consider the whole end user experience as well. All the reviews, charts, graphs, and threads don't mean much to me if I'm not enjoying the card.

Since the R9 290 Tri-X is specifically mentioned, I'll explain why I got rid of mine.

First, the card really isn't all that quiet. Sure, compared to the awful AMD reference blower, it's a massive improvement (I have owned both a Tri-X and a reference 290). However, the Tri-X cooler suffers from a design flaw that causes the entire cooler to resonate a certain RPM frequencies. Most end users misdiagnose this as the fans grinding against the heat sink fans, but it's just vibration and it sounds terrible.

not my card, but mine sounded exactly like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rf4f9wsO84

Then there is the issue with the inexplicable black screens. Randomly, out of no where, sitting at the desktop, the display just goes black... I'd have to hard reset the system to get back to the desktop, and there are were no error logs I could find, except for the hard reset. It might be five times a day, or once a week, but inevitably the black screen returns.

Searching for a fix shows it's pretty wide spread, affects multiple AMD cards, and is sporadic in nature. The general consensus is that it is an ongoing driver related issue that AMD is unable to resolve completely.

I ended up picking up a used Asus GTX 780 DirectCU II for about right in between the price of a used R9 290 and a new GTX 970. I've been happy with the replacement thus far. The card is much quieter than the Tri-X, and has been rock stable.

Just my personal experiences with the R9 290, and why I might pay a little bit more for a comparable NVIDIA card. That being said, if you can overlook some eccentricities (or don't have the black screen issue with your setup) the R9 290 is hands down the best gaming bang for the buck.

 

[exar333]

I am really confused why I see so many comparisons with 290s and 290Xs here? Yes, you are talking about 'only' $50-65, but that's a pretty big price difference at the $200 mark. This card competes with 280/285/280x cards from AMD, that's it. Please don't throw-in used card prices and so forth, because that's not applicable to 95% of the market...

It's a power efficient, 'decent performing' 1080P card. That's pretty much it. Great for OEMs and OK for home users with small power capabilities.

If NV can release a 960Ti (for lack of a better term) with 3-4GB RAM and more memory bandwith at ~$250, that will be a much better product, but again more expensive. That will be the card trading-blows with the 290s out there....

Lastly, cards in this price-range are generally discounted or offer rebates soon after the initial launch. Just as we see 280s/280x/285s with decent 25-30$ rebates, I would expect similar 'deals' on the 960 in a month or two. I wouldn't even be too surprised to see a few of these get closer to $150 eventually, with an offer or rebate.

 

[Mondozei]

I'd agree with the 290 point, but only to some extent. The cheapest 290 (with decent cooler) goes for 240 dollars. Some after-market versions of the GTX 960 go for 210 dollars. That's just a 30 dollar premium. How many people would save 30 dollars and not double VRAM and get 40% extra performance?

The reality is that this card is a flop. It's such a flop, that it's even close to a R9-290 in price despite being vastly outgunned in every department(as you'd expect).

Remember, a R9-290 is, after the latest drivers, faster than a GTX Titan and by about 10% in composite performance indexes. And you're telling me someone would buy a card only 30 dollars cheaper than a card that beats a GTX Titan?

I'm not buying the "95% of the market" claim to that. But it's true that some people really can only spend a fixed amount and just 20-30 dollars is too much. But then you can save 60-70 dollars instead and get a 280. Someone who feels like 30 dollars is too much simply can't rationally turn down saving 60-70 dollars instead unless that person is either A) misinformed/uninformed or B) extremely loyal to Nvidia.

Honestly, as someone who has used Nvidia in the 3 out of 4 of my latest GPUs, this isn't really "which brand do you prefer" in this case. It's a no-brainer at this point.

Any review that obfuscates this loses credibility. Nvidia has completely lost the value crown, the facts and the numbers are in all of our faces. There's no denying anymore.

 

[Ranulf]

Honestly, as someone who has used Nvidia in the 3 out of 4 of my latest GPUs, this isn't really "which brand do you prefer" in this case. It's a no-brainer at this point.

Any review that obfuscates this loses credibility. Nvidia has completely lost the value crown, the facts and the numbers are in all of our faces. There's no denying anymore.

Agreed but hey, perf/watt is king! All hail the new king!

For me the power consumption argument falls flat anymore. Its especially silly when talking about high end systems that are overclocked. You'll save far more on power costs going to cfl or led bulbs in your home than worrying about 50-100w with your computer while gaming.

 

[RussianSensation]

Since the R9 290 Tri-X is specifically mentioned, I'll explain why I got rid of mine.

However, the Tri-X cooler suffers from a design flaw that causes the entire cooler to resonate a certain RPM frequencies.

I wouldn't extrapolate your unlucky experience with the Sapphire Tri-X across all Tri-Xs and especially not against all after-market R9 290s. Sounds like you had a really bad card, which sucks but most of us had a fan fail, coil whine or some other issue with some NV/ATI/AMD card over the last 20 years.

Here is Asus DCUII 290 vs. Sapphire Tri-X R9 290 at full load starting at around the 8 minute mark - whisper quiet!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYxmW4JiJs8

Had a bad experience with Sapphire, no problem, Asus DCUII 290 is also quiet.

Then there is the issue with the inexplicable black screens. Randomly, out of no where, sitting at the desktop, the display just goes black...
Searching for a fix shows it's pretty wide spread, affects multiple AMD cards, and is sporadic in nature. The general consensus is that it is an ongoing driver related issue that AMD is unable to resolve completely.

How many cards suffer from these black screen issues? I've heard of AMD cards having black screens since HD7000 series and I had one of my Sapphires black screen within days to never come back. I returned it to the retailer and got a new card. Some cards are just DOA within 30 days of purchase.

What about black screens and NV driver crashing in Starcraft 2, a hugely popular game?
https://www.google.com/search?q=random+black+screens+with+Nvidia+in+Starcraft+2&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

But not everyone has them so it would be unfair to criticize the entire NV brand for having non-workable products for SC2.

I am really confused why I see so many comparisons with 290s and 290Xs here? Yes, you are talking about 'only' $50-65, but that's a pretty big price difference at the $200 mark.

You are joking, right? PC games cost $50 MSRP at launch. Do you realize what saving $50 over 2-3 years actually means in this case?!

As I said before, name 1 time in the 20-year-history of ATI/NV/AMD where you could pay $40-60 more for a competitor's card and get 40-50% more performance and double the VRAM. That never happened, ever.

There is no need to specifically address the Sapphire Tri-X 290 because other R9 290 cards go on sale for $240-275 with rebates ALL the time in the US. Most users report that the card being cool and quiet. Every brand has duds.

What about my country?

Here in Canada:

GTX960 - $249-269
R9 290 - $249-329

When GTX960 is $150 with rebates, you'll have a point, but today it's not on sale at those prices, but R9 280 is $150 and R9 290 can be regularly found for $240-270.

 

[skipsneeky2]

Looks like anyone who was hoping the 960 was a good upgrade over a 660/670/760/7850/7870 from over 2 years really is in a world of hurt.

Really does suck,if i had my 7850 that failed on me in 2013 still i would be looking at this review 2 years later and then most likely swapping out my CX500 i had back then and dropping in a $280 290 Tri-x next week with a new 650w psu

 

[exar333]

Not calling-out AT here, but doesn't there seem to be some excuse for a late review on almost every major release over the past few months? Apparently the 960 is no exception...

No click ads from me AT! I had to go to Guru3D for a good review...

 

[PPB]

Obviously NV wouldnt let AMD be the only one to have such a horrid release at the mid end with their R9 285 and they released the 960.

Its mind blogging that both companies all they can offer after so many years after the GK104 and Tahiti is improved perf/watt with ALMOST ZERO gain in absolute perf. People would just rather have more performance at same power and price in their next generation of cards, not this eco-green BS.


PD: Its so funny when people talk about perf-watt when playing videogames. I mean, if you really want to be ecology friendly when talking about entertainment (sorry buds, playing videogames is just that, except for the LoL pros that actually make money out of playing games), just go play cards or chess.

 

[crisium]

Verdict: Avoid like the plague. Find deals for faster and cheaper 280x/7970 if you are budget oriented. Find deals for tremendously faster 290 if you are willing to pay a bit more.

Spoiler

This card will sell quite well. It is "Nvidia" and "power consumption".

 

[skipsneeky2]

I had to go to Guru3D for a good review...

The G1 Gaming review and those load temperatures wow. That really is the only card in the flock i really even care about.Just seeing a overkill of a cooler on that card is awesome.

 

[Head1985]

2GB Vram killing this card

 

[skipsneeky2]

2GB Vram killing this card

Looking at that chart and that 970,there wouldn't be enough performance for a 960 if it came with 8gb lol. I wouldn't run those frames or settings period on a 970.

 

[nitromullet]

I wouldn't extrapolate your unlucky experience with the Sapphire Tri-X across all Tri-Xs and especially not against all after-market R9 290s. Sounds like you had a really bad card, which sucks but most of us had a fan fail, coil whine or some other issue with some NV/ATI/AMD card over the last 20 years.

Here is Asus DCUII 290 vs. Sapphire Tri-X R9 290 at full load starting at around the 8 minute mark - whisper quiet!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYxmW4JiJs8

Had a bad experience with Sapphire, no problem, Asus DCUII 290 is also quiet.



How many cards suffer from these black screen issues? I've heard of AMD cards having black screens since HD7000 series and I had one of my Sapphires black screen within days to never come back. I returned it to the retailer and got a new card. Some cards are just DOA within 30 days of purchase.

What about black screens and NV driver crashing in Starcraft 2, a hugely popular game?
https://www.google.com/search?q=random+black+screens+with+Nvidia+in+Starcraft+2&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

But not everyone has them so it would be unfair to criticize the entire NV brand for having non-workable products for SC2.

as I said:

if you can overlook some eccentricities (or don't have the black screen issue with your setup) the R9 290 is hands down the best gaming bang for the buck.

Just my opinion based on my personal experience having owned the card being discussed.

 

[escrow4]

What is this [Redacted] card? Its something you put in an office box as an upgrade to the iGPU. Who would game on this? Where are the real Ti GPUs?

Profanity is not permitted in the technical forums.

-Rvenger

 

[cmdrdredd]

What is this [removed profanity] card? Its something you put in an office box as an upgrade to the iGPU. Who would game on this? Where are the real Ti GPUs?

If you want more performance you spend more money. It's not a tough concept. If you need more, you gotta open the wallet a bit. Wanna play it cheap? You get what you get.

 

[RussianSensation]

Verdict: Avoid like the plague. Find deals for faster and cheaper 280x/7970 if you are budget oriented. Find deals for tremendously faster 290 if you are willing to pay a bit more.

960 SLI = $400
vs.
R9 290 = $250

285/960 = Worst mid-range videocards in years.

:thumbsdown:

Looks like anyone who was hoping the 960 was a good upgrade over a 660/670/760/7850/7870 from over 2 years really is in a world of hurt.

Not sure if you recall my post where I said that first the sub-$100 desktop dGPU market became underwhelming, then sub-$150 market and now it's creeping into the $200 mark. NV and AMD want us to buy $250+ cards. If you want value, you'll have to change your buying habits and look for last gen discounted cards on flash sales or go looking in the used card market for HD7970/R9 280X/R9 290. Otherwise, the new 'mid-range' market as far as I am concerned is $250-350, no longer $199. It's unlikely that AMD will be generous either as they need all the profits they can get. If the rumours of a mid-range R9 380X coming close to a GTX980 are true, AMD will drop that mid-range card at $349-399, and raise R9 390 to $549, 390X to $699. I believe the days of next gen mid-range cards with good performance at $199-249 like GTX460 OC or GTX560Ti are way way behind us.

For ALL the people in this thread that think the hate on 960 is some AMD marketing campaign/NV hate or some other non-sense, just to show you how garbage the 960 is today in NV's own line-up, please take a look at how far NV has come in the last couple generations when it came to giving YOU value in the mid-range:

GTX560Ti = $250 = 100%
GTX570 = $350 = 116% ($100 more for 16% more performance, or $6.25 for each 1% of additional performance )
GTX580 = $500 = 134% ($250 more for 34% more performance, or $7.35 for each 1% of additional performance)

vs. now

GTX960 = $199
GTX970 = $329 ($130 more for 50% more performance, or $2.60 for every 1% of additional performance)
GTX980 = $549 ($350 more for 70% more performance, or $5 for every 1% of additional performance)

Notice how amazing GTX970/980 look compared to a GTX960, a stark contrast to GTX560Ti vs. 570/580. You know why that is? Because the GTX960 is overpriced AND too slow. The value 970 offers over the 960 is incredible.

WAKE UP!

If you want NV, save some $ and get a 970. If you want AMD, save some $ and get an R9 290. For the love of PC gaming, do not get suckered into $180-200 285/960. Send a signal to both NV and AMD that these gimped mid-range cards aren't good enough.

@ snipsneeky2,

Imagine how you'd feel right now if you snapped up a $280 MSI TwinFrozr III HD7950/Sapphire Dual-X HD7950 925mhz around Summer 2013, which happened to overclock to 1.15-1.75Ghz. Really this card is a 950Ti, while 970 is a 960, 980 is a 960Ti. We know the real deal folks.

 

[Lord XenoTeK]

So many people asking how nVidia could have the audacity to set the MSRP at $200 for this card.

What you have to realize is that nV truly believes they can ask this price because of the "added value" of the technologies that come with it, such as MFAA, VXGI, and all their other stuff such as PhysX.

I must admit I tend to learn towards nVidia products these days, but if I were in the market for a card in this price range I would be looking elsewhere.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

If you want more performance you spend more money. It's not a tough concept. If you need more, you gotta open the wallet a bit. Wanna play it cheap? You get what you get.

Or you could spend less money and get an R9 280.