Radeon R9 280X  vs GeForce GTX 770 

2 years later.................. 280x PWNED 770 completely.

Now I know this site is biased for Nividia. I have a R9 285 that is slightly slower than a 280x and I get 125-130FPS in Bioshock Infinite on Ultra settings. If I used the massive overclock on my GPU I would do 150FPS and I am happy to show anyone who asks me. So where are they getting these numbers?

KILLED, the card's dead.

The AMD fanboys!! They are everywhere!!

Well, ok. There you are right - it's also not great quality but I think this will be improved. Although I don't really remember any ads, or they are at least not disturbing.

Oh, I didn't know that. I had no performance impact, but that might be because I had an FX-8320, an eight core from which mostly only 4 cores are used at gaming - so theoretically Raptr had 4 cores to use for recording. ;) I also didn't see any ads, or at least they weren't that noticeable. But that could have been changed... I liked Raptr to be honest, just not the recodrding function in therms of quality, but that could be improved in the future, or already has... I wasn't online for some months, because I currently have no PC.. :/

Not in any aspect other than heat build rate. The 280 is a good deal in price to performance and comes to just under 76% of the 770's performance, 79% for the 280x. But the heat it produces is vastly greater, about 10*C more than the 770. In addition the 280/280x may have the 1GB of additional VRAM, but the Tahiti GPU is not able to fully utilize it. So it gains nothing when running at higher resolutions.

Some Virtualization features are disabled. If thats what your going for you buy a Xeon. For gaming and multimedia it's the i series.

With a performance impact and developed by a third party with ads, in addition you cannot record the desktop so if the game is not supported you are out of luck. With Nvidias Shadowplay, you simply turn it on when you want it and turn it off when you don't. The ads alone were bad enough. I don't use third party, namely Raptr in this case.

I live all the benchmarks. They are just window dressing. Under real world use the story changes. I have both of these cards. The gtx-770 is clunky And the radeon is buttery smooth.

Yes, AMD doesn't support CUDA. I also checked it out on my card via GPU-Z. :)

"Noob" ;) http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/ASUS-GTX-770-Nvidia-GeForce-DirectCU-II-OC-2GB-GDDR5-Graphics-Card-PCI-Express-/171562590359?pt=UK_Computing_Computer_Components_Graphics_Video_TV_Cards_TW&hash=item27f1ed6097

Well amazon also made a $300 card into $600.....

On their Individual Assessments The GTX 770 scores an 8.2 : http://gpuboss.com/graphics-card/GeForce-GTX-770 and The R9 280x scores an 8.5 :http://gpuboss.com/graphics-card/Radeon-R9-280X But apparently when they compare against each other, the Nvidial cards, "Magically" comes out on top. Loads of Horse Shit, I tell ya!!!

Communist system we are under ? Joke? you know what comunism means no ?

AMD tiene la mejor relacion precio/producto/rendimiento. y te vende lo que verdaderamente vas a necesitar a mitad de precio que nvidia, en cambio. Nvidia te vende productos compatibles con plataformas solo creadas para que te compres y te gastes dinero en una nvidia, que a su vez no hay que quitarle el merito de que consume menos. Es la misma comparativa que si la realizamos entre AMD e Intel. AMD sale ganando siempre. Apenas vas a notar el gasto del consumo por el rendimiento que te pueda ofrecer el ultimo i7. Bueno y ahora con las meomrias ddr4 que casualidad que primero lo sacan para los intel.......

"Thirdly in real world tests the r9 280 (not the 280x) is a much better deal for money"

Yes, I just saw that now. My bad. Spec Nazis are damn helpful.

Reading fail. He has speccing 8Gb (it says 4gb x2).

mine i5 3570k does support it.. who told you that?

I gotta say I agree with the majority of visitors who think this site is biased toward the green team. 770 and 280x is close it's true but why does AMD lose every time? As far as troubles are concerned, I have had more hassle with nVidia cards personaly and would encourage people to buy Radeon. Yes they have their problems but both do. Anyways, check out reviews on the net and decide what you want, remember though that the samples reviewers recieve aren't guarenteed to be the same as the one you purchase. My 280x is a Sapphire Dual X and performs brilliantly at 1080p on MAX on all my games (Titanfall, COD Ghosts..). Happy gaming and don't be a fanboy, it's just annoying.

I'm gonna try to give the most fair comparison here. I own both cards. So R9 280x if we talk FPS stats compared to the Nvidia 770 there is 1-8 frame difference in AMD's Favor, but who cares 90% of the time we are arguing two frames you cannot see this difference in game .... although I will say this if you think that AMD has bad recording stop it right now..... Gaming evolved from AMD has gone a long way and recording is pretty good..( Although these recording things are in beta) so you can come across problems... So nvidia in this aspect is more secure..... One thing is the R9 280x does indeed artifact but it is so minuscule and so easy to fix just alt tab and go back into game it will refresh card. Also don't listen to people waste your time about CUDA, PHYSX..... PHYSX is possible on AMD proccessors only thing is.. set it up is a pain! I think the bottom line is go for what is cheaper.... which most of the time is AMD but keep in mind .......... If you want to have a plug and play type of GPU because you dont have patience, go for Nvidia... they usually don't have problems and their is very little to tweak

They go purely by system specs, which are higher for Nvidia. The system doesn't account for card architecture, if you're looking for absolute comparisons look at fucking benchmarks.

all things being equal (build quality, heat tolerance, general performance) I may go with nVidia because of their "Cuda Cores"... though I do like AMD for their OpenCL performance. It would be nice to get say a 780 or a 290 that draws less than 225W.

OpenCL is getting more popular - they should have more benchmarks on OpenCL for AMD and nVidia. They should also mention the programs and systems that support OpenCL. Apple seems to be pushing OpenCL and has some nice FirePro options on the new Mac "mini" Pro (cylinder). Also, those systems only use sa 450W PSU - money!