Is an hd 290X worth it for $300?

There's one Asus DCII on sale for $300. Good upgrade from a gtx 580 or better wait the 300's series?

No considering you can get a 970 for $330

I would not recommend buying an Asus DCII 290x card. Asus just stuck a GTX 780ti cooler on a 290x instead of making one specially for it. Some people say that it works ok, but lots of people have issues with the cooler, and benchmark sites temperature scores vary massively, with some sites reporting it to be barely better than the reference cooler.

Here is a picture of the cooler vs the size of the GPU its cooling, clearly meant for a bigger nvidia chip, two of the heatpipes don't even touch the GPU.

Here is Hexus.net's chart showing a bunch of other 290x models and their coolers against the Asus:

That said a 290x for $300 or less is a great card if you can get a decent model like the Sapphire Tri-X. Especially if you can get the game bundles with it

@ferret-gamer said:

I would not recommend buying an Asus DCII 290x card. Asus just stuck a GTX 780ti cooler on a 290x instead of making one specially for it. Some people say that it works ok, but lots of people have issues with the cooler, and benchmark sites temperature scores vary massively, with some sites reporting it to be barely better than the reference cooler.

Here is a picture of the cooler vs the size of the GPU its cooling, clearly meant for a bigger nvidia chip, two of the heatpipes don't even touch the GPU.

Here is Hexus.net's chart showing a bunch of other 290x models and their coolers against the Asus:

That said a 290x for $300 or less is a great card if you can get a decent model like the Sapphire Tri-X. Especially if you can get the game bundles with it

Wow...that's nuts. I LOVE Asus' DC2 cooler, but this is a whole other level of poor design! Thanks for pointing that out...it's very interesting.

To the op...if you love amd, do it. If not, a 970 may be worth the premium.

Like Ferret said get the Sapphire Tri-X....runs way cooler.

As been said either GTX970 for 330-350$ or may I suggest R9 290 for 250$ and OC it to the same level as 290X

No one buys today the 290X unless it would been sold for over 10$ more than the 290.

The 290X comes alread OC with almost no OC headroom, while the 290 is the same GPU but without stock OC from the company with plenty headroom for OC so it could reach to 290X performance.

oh i didn't know that. this is in canadian dollars btw and sadly most 970's with a good cooler are $380++. If i find a gtx970 like the Twin Frozr IV for $330 CND i'd buy it in a heartbeat.

http://ca.pcpartpicker.com/part/gigabyte-video-card-gvr929wf34gd go with this one, Winforce is OC very well, similar to Sapphire Tri-X

280$ after rebate, but if you think that the extra 20$ worth the trouble you might get into OC (which is the easiest since it's controlled best with MSI Afterburner) then get the 290X

You're actually getting the DCU2 for 30$ less, I wouldn't say Asus GPUs are bad, but there're not special - their new STRIX editions on the other hand are IMO D-best.

reviews are pretty bad on this winforce (from newegg), people have a lot of problems with this model. strix 970, g1 970 and twin frozr v 970 is kinda what i've been wanting but they cost too much here in canada.

r9 290x have been dipping close to 260 dollars. Do not get one at 300

Gigabyte usually is reliable and good OC.

Not entirely true, the 290 has some disabled stream processors. 2816 vs 2560 SPUs. Depending on the PCB and memory it is possible to unlock them with a bios flash, but that is heavily dependent on luck and buying the right model.

Also, the 290x having no OC headroom is a bit of an exaggeration, a decent 290x should be able to get a 20% core/mem overclock.

ASUS cooler is shit on 290's. They took an Nvidia cooler and stuck it on a HOT ATI card.. VRM temps are outrageous.
Get a Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X and OC it and you'll have a 290X (which happens to be one of the best R9 290's out there).
I'm running a mediocore OC on my R9 290's and they're already 4% faster then R9 290X.

The Sapphire one looks like a great card but I'd check you have a psu to run it because you may need to upgrade. I went with the 970 myself largly because I only have a 500w psu, plus I felt the urge to go green for the first time.

i have a 850w cooler master silent pro so psu isn't a problem. the sapphire is $380-450 in canada, too much.

@silversix_: I was looking at UK prices for the 290 out of curiosity and the cheapest here is the Sapphire, whch is probably the best one, and it works out at 423 Canadian dollars. To be honest, I'd be kind of sceptical about really low priced versions because it has a reputation for getting extremely hot and you could run into issues. I'd consider saving a little for something like the 970 or even waiting for AMD's new cards to come out.

if i save up, i better wait for the 300's series that is supposed to come out in February? I really wanted to grab a card now because my 580 doesn't handle DA:I well at all and i want to run this game at settings higher than a ps4

520w rocking 290 :D Quality psus goes a long way.

I would recommend a 970 gtx.. Better performance, draws A LOT less power and runs alot cooler..

@demi0227_basic said:

@ferret-gamer said:

I would not recommend buying an Asus DCII 290x card. Asus just stuck a GTX 780ti cooler on a 290x instead of making one specially for it. Some people say that it works ok, but lots of people have issues with the cooler, and benchmark sites temperature scores vary massively, with some sites reporting it to be barely better than the reference cooler.

Here is a picture of the cooler vs the size of the GPU its cooling, clearly meant for a bigger nvidia chip, two of the heatpipes don't even touch the GPU.

Here is Hexus.net's chart showing a bunch of other 290x models and their coolers against the Asus:

That said a 290x for $300 or less is a great card if you can get a decent model like the Sapphire Tri-X. Especially if you can get the game bundles with it

Wow...that's nuts. I LOVE Asus' DC2 cooler, but this is a whole other level of poor design! Thanks for pointing that out...it's very interesting.

To the op...if you love amd, do it. If not, a 970 may be worth the premium.

It is worth the premium.. The reason being is not just because it is more powerful, but draws alot less power and runs alot cooler (overclocking the 970 has had reviews showing it reaching 980 gtx performance levels).

get the 970 it has better shader,is a little bit more powerful has a lower power consumation and the drivers are better for the same price

So i was looking at this model of the 290, is it any good? Rarely hear of Club3d. How does this one fare compared to say a gtx 970?

It's certainty a good card but the 970 though....

Just spend 30$ more for a GTX 970.

Spend 33 dollars more and get a GTX 970 which is more powerful.

Inless your dead set on AMD.. GET a freaking 970 Gtx (recommend the MSI, asus models or the Gigabyte one (if you can fit it in your case)).. It runs far cooler, it draws far less energy, stock it outperforms the 290, if you overclock it.. It can reach 980 GTX levels in performance.. This should be a no brainer... Furthermore if you get the MSI or Asus ones for basically any game that isn't extremely demanding the fans will barely spin if at all.. Both those cards the fans are turned off until they reach 55 to 60 degrees C. Furthermore you will save money by picking the 970 GTX.. Guru3d has a nice break down of the ACTUAL costs of running the card for the entire year on average of 4 to 5 hours a day.. The 290 is going to cost $30 MORE a year in energy costs over the 970 gtx.. The 290x costs even more to run per year.. And runs hot as hell too boot.. Don't get a 290 if you have a choice to get a 970 gtx.. The only other option I would say is to wait for ATI's R9 3X0 series to release which are supposedly is going to be more efficient and powerful than the R9 2X0 line up..

im not set on amd at all, in fact, i'd prefer Nvidia but i can't get any gtx 970's because all the great overclockers are $400+ canadian dollars. Can't go this high. When is the r9 300's series supposed to come out exactly? Im sure the 970 will drop in price when they come out.

no it' isn't, there was one on sale here for 240 and i still bought a 280x second handed for 130 bucks.

The power consumption is just too much to pay 300$ for this card.

You crack me up.. lol.
They were going for $210 few weeks back (brand new).
Power consumption has something to do with price..?

It's just a rough estimate, i live in europe. But 210$ for a290x , that's very cheap.

yes power consumption has something to do with it, of course, elektricity cost money.

It's amazing we have to explain it to people.. Guru3d broke the costs down nicely.. 5 hours a day for 5 days a week for the 970 gtx will cost $50 roughly a year in energy costs.. While the 290x will cost some where around $90 a year, and the 290 will costs $70 a year.. If people are fucking fretting about not wanting to pay an extra $40 for the 970, why are they not fretting for the increased cost in energy bills by the card? Especially when you will be running it for at least 2 to 3 years..

@sSubZerOo:

That's $1.66 a month I believe....most people could dig that out of their cars cup holder. A $30 up front difference might be a little more difficult for some people. Plus some might live with parents and don't have to pay a electricity bill anyway.

.........This isn't fucking rocket science.. Quite literally the first year you have the card you will BREAK EVEN with the 290 or will be CHEAPER than the 290x all while having a more powerful card to boot.. If $30 is going to make you fret when you already spending $300, maybe YOU SHOULDN'T be spending the money to begin with.

I understand. I understood the first time. However what if you don't pay the electric bill? Maybe that's a nonissue to some.

Maybe he is a high school kid and has had to save money to get a new card. Who knows man, people have their own reasons and it's not for you to decide who should spend what.

$20 - $40 a year... wow that's expensive!
If you're buying a card for $300 - $330 then it shouldn't be a problem to pay a tiny little bit extra a year.
People pay more for xbox live yearly.

@insane_metalist: it certainly is when the 290x lags behind the 970 gtx. So your not only

getting a card that isn't as good and runs hot. Your getting a card that will cost you more money in the long run.

There's like, 3% - 4% difference. If you buy the right card it won't be hot. My Gigabyte runs @ 82C tops. Vapor-X, Trix-X run around 78C and you can get a 290X for cheaper then a GTX 970.

@insane_metalist: except the fact that 290x draws almost twice as much energy for costs. So it is more expensive than a 970 gtx the very first year you use it. The 970 stock already surpasses the 290x, meanwhile if you overclock it you can reach close to 980 gtx performance. Something the 290x from h merous reviewers have said is not a good overclocker due to heat..

I suppose the general concensus is that, if at all possible, you should get a 970 :) MSI has'nt failed me yet. Neither has Asus, but I've somehow managed to exclusively buy Nvidia cards since 3DFX.

Seriously true that. It also depends on the users too, does the person game every moment that hes on the computer or does he spend 2/3 of the time surfing the web or doing activities on the computer that doesn't require 50-100% gpu's strength.

If power is such an issue for anyone of you than I'm sorry pc gaming isn't for you. Performance > green blah.

Yep

Those temperatures are crazy. I recently got an MSI GTX 970 and the highest temp was 73 when I started going crazy overclocking. Without OC it stays around 65 no matter what game. It's a truly awesome card. I'd pay a little more and go for the 970. Those temps are very troubling.

But those temps are not normal for most 290s. My Sapphire runs at 70 max.

All depends on the cooler used, as well with case cooling. 290's with stock coolers can reach above 90C. You happen to have Vapor X cooler on that 290? its one the best coolers you can get for AMD based gpu's which averages mid 70's. The better cooler on the 900's the Windforce x3 keeps the 980 with OC below 70c

That's why I said most. I don't think there are a lot of 290s with stock coolers these days. I'm sure you could find them but I don't think the majority out there run hot like that.

Any more on sale no, but you have to think about all the ones that were from late 2013 to good part of 2014. Alot of shortages made people pick the stock coolers

It IS a concern if your being held off from spending the extra $30 for a more efficient, cooler and BETTER performing card.. I would completely agree with you if it were not for the fact that the 970 GTX can overclock to 980 levels of performance, runs alot cooler, draws LESS energy all for $30 more.. NOT to mention you can use the 970 Gtx on a 520 watt PSU.. If you have np spending the greater amount of money it would cost in energy by choosing the other card, then why is it a problem with spending the $30 more right now for the better card?? I mean do you guys do finances? If you getting your panties in a knot because of a extra $30 or so, why wouldn't you be concerned from the possibly extra $30 to $45 more per year to run the card? A card YET again performs worse than it.. I mean this is basic math people.. $30<<<< $20 to $40 more per year X 2 to 3 years of using it (at least).. All for a card that performs worse than the 970 gtx.... If that is indeed a trivial amount.. Than so is the extra $30..

Oh please, it does not cost $30-45 more a year to run a 290x unless you have unbelievably expensive electricity, or are running the card full load 24/7, and even then that is pushing it. $5-10 a year is a far more realistic amount for the majority of people. That would be 3+ years to make up the difference in price.

Yes the 970 might perform slightly better at 1080p, but the average difference is within a few percent, it is nothing to write home about. There are plenty of games where the 290x out performs the 970 as well, and at higher resolutions claiming the 970 is better becomes a lot more doubtful. Also, a 290x can be oc'd to a 980's performance level as well.

I would say at a difference of $30, what you choose is largely preference.

The r9 290 is the best overall deal. They can be found for $250 or less, and is only around 5-10% slower than the 290x. Overclocking the 290 can easly put it back up with the 970 and 290x. At $80 less than a 970 its hard to argue against the 290 as being a much better deal

I was more alluding to the point that people on this board and in general makes a big fuss about energy savings when is hardly there. If anyone really wanted to save $ than unplug your fridge!

Besides I ran 290 oc'd before past the level of 290x stock power usage under an old 520w exact and haven't shutdown from lack of power.

Its the opposite actually the shortages existed right by the launch and many of those stock coolers ended up as mine cards. Around the time that it recovered they were no longer making the stock blowers. Though I was guilty of getting one of those ex-mined cards for $200 last year which was a steal at the time.

You're just fan boying now. If you want to go green then do it. We're helping out TC here. All three cards GTX 970 / R9 290 / R9 290X are great cards.
Besides my 290's and most others overclock great.

He's not fanboying he's stating the truth, 290x on a full load can use 290w+ while a 970 is around 165w. Now adding energy costs over a period of time saved is in a way being overzealous. But again to some it means something especially if your paying the electric bill, myself replacing a plasma tv with a led lcd saving me around $20-25 a month. So it does have some merit. He was stating 290x's not 290's which 290x do have a much lower overclock headroom. But yeah their all great gpu's but the 970 just has the edge on all fronts besides increase in cost.