GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of R9 290 vs 970 among Desktop GPUs

Gaming

Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 21 more

Graphics

T-Rex, Manhattan, Cloud Gate Factor, Sky Diver Factor and 1 more

Computing

Face Detection, Ocean Surface Simulation and 3 more

Performance per Watt

Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more

Value

Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more

Noise and Power

TDP, Idle Power Consumption, Load Power Consumption and 2 more

7.3

Overall Score

Winner
Nvidia GeForce GTX 970 

GPUBoss recommends the Nvidia GeForce GTX 970  based on its compute performance and noise and power.

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with GPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Radeon R9 290

Reasons to consider the
AMD Radeon R9 290

Report a correction
Much better 3DMark06 score 32,300 vs 15,071 Around 2.2x better 3DMark06 score
Significantly higher memory bandwidth 320 GB/s vs 224.4 GB/s Around 45% higher memory bandwidth
Better floating-point performance 4,800 GFLOPS vs 3,494 GFLOPS More than 35% better floating-point performance
Higher texture rate 152 GTexel/s vs 109.2 GTexel/s Around 40% higher texture rate
Significantly more shading units 2,560 vs 1,664 896 more shading units
Significantly more texture mapping units 160 vs 104 56 more texture mapping units
Much wider memory bus 512 bit vs 256 bit 2x wider memory bus
More render output processors 64 vs 56 8 more render output processors
Slightly better bitcoin mining score 540.64 mHash/s vs 487.83 mHash/s More than 10% better bitcoin mining score
Front view of GeForce GTX 970

Reasons to consider the
Nvidia GeForce GTX 970

Report a correction
Significantly higher effective memory clock speed 7,012 MHz vs 5,000 MHz More than 40% higher effective memory clock speed
Better PassMark score 8,563 vs 7,049 More than 20% better PassMark score
Higher clock speed 1,050 MHz vs 947 MHz More than 10% higher clock speed
Much higher memory clock speed 1,753 MHz vs 1,125 MHz More than 55% higher memory clock speed
Higher turbo clock speed 1,178 MHz vs 947 MHz Around 25% higher turbo clock speed
Better PassMark direct compute score 4,375 vs 3,242 Around 35% better PassMark direct compute score
Higher BioShock infinite framerate 107.6 fps vs 91.5 fps Around 20% higher BioShock infinite framerate
Much lower TDP 148W vs 300W 2x lower TDP

Benchmarks Real world tests of Radeon R9 290 vs GeForce GTX 970

Bitcoin mining Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 290
540.64 mHash/s
GeForce GTX 970
487.83 mHash/s

Face detection Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 290
108.76 mPixels/s
GeForce GTX 970
148.77 mPixels/s

Ocean surface simulation Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 290
2,473.76 frames/s
GeForce GTX 970
1,586.77 frames/s

T-Rex (GFXBench 3.0) Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 290
3,356.28
GeForce GTX 970
3,357.68

Manhattan (GFXBench 3.0) Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 290
3,712.67
GeForce GTX 970
3,718.86

Fire Strike Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Sky Diver Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Crysis 3

Reviews Word on the street

Radeon R9 290  vs GeForce GTX 970 

9.4
9.7
Today, we're reviewing the EVGA GeForce GTX 970 SuperClocked ACX, a non-reference design, factory-overclocked GTX 970 graphics card, which comes with a custom-design PCB, and the company's signature ACX cooler, which features an aluminium stack heatsink that uses a trio of copper heat pipes, to draw heat directly from the GPU die, and dissipate it under the airflow of two 80 mm fans.
GeForce GTX 970

Comments

Showing 25 comments.
One should not res such a old topic. True might have been the PSU even tho I calculated it out. Got a 390 later and now I have a modded Vega. Gonna switch to the next TI card tho. AMD makes it hard for me even tho my 6700k runs on 4,8Ghz I run into CPU bottlenecks.
Why do they need to spread there legs????õ¿õ
You know you need a good PSU for the r 290s AND if you crossfire you be better off with a good 1000 watt PSU or your asking for troubles your cards sound like they need a bios update have you contacted the vendor?Or looked to see if there is a new firmware for them.
Yeah its funny isnt it grab a chair and a bucket of popcorn!
I have both camps in my computers I do own 2 r 290s 1 is a power color pcs+ runs cool and i never see it get hot or throttle. 2 Is the sapphire x3 fans blue trim led wonderful card again it does not get too hot games for hours awesome resolution .. and I have some from the other camp 660 3 580 and did you know a nvidia 315nvs quadro has dx 12 support? Anyhow I look at what I can afford and what best suits the build sure Id love to have a 1080ti or A KINGPIN.... but I am poor as everyone else they both make good cards why argue over them because if there was only 1 just 1 company making our gpu cards we be paying 3 times the amount of money we do now!
So are you gaming on 800x600 what about those ryzen cpus wow ...
That's why I bought in the 1st computer the 290, and in the second one the 970, and both made the same result :P HAHHAH and so that no one cries yes, I did it just so that I experiment in my own the pure marketing world in which they make us live
He could be an Aussie... everything is high here.. and its card to keep are computers cool
I screwed up choosing the 970, Worst GPU I have ever owned! I will never buy Nvidia again. The drivers just plain suck!
Update. Traded in my r9 290 for a gtx 980ti sea hawk. The 290 preformed great as long as the case had very good air intake and exhaust. If i did not have enough fans to move the heat out and cooler air in it would over heat. I would say the card is great except for the heating issue. Its the biggest flaw. If you do not have a good static pressure fan bringing in cooler air and a decent normal fan exhausting be careful. The 980ti sea hawk i replaced it with is amazing. I have a 4k monitor and most graphic intense games i play at 1440p reso and get 60fps on high/ultra. Overwatch i play on epic settings at 4k and get 60fps. and it never gets hotter then 65c even when its at maximum power usage. I bet soon you will be able to buy them on ebay for under a 1070s price.
Glad you just proved my point better. It does get better performance.
"much better performance"
Much better performance, lower tdp, and lower heat for just a little more cost. I guess gtx 970 wins in every way here.
AMD fanboy spotted. The 290 has huge driver issues.
r9 290 doesn't stand a chance. Also, benchmarks don't matter cos the gtx 970 does better at actual real life performance.
the under dog being?
I have both and the R9 290 sucked my cock compared to my MSI GTX 970 GAMING. Not to mention my R9 caused constant black screens.
i love how 90% of the comments on this site are Nvidia people agreeing with the statement provided by the comparison. And then AMD fanboys throwing a fit about Nvidia users and calling them filthy fanboys. Which I'm sure they wouldn't do if they actually had anything to defend AMD with. *shrug*
I love reading the retarded shit people post on here. The thing to remember really is that AMD still innovates new technologies, MANTLE hepled get Vulcan up & running & also forced MS to improve DirectX performance. Also AMD has the only GPU right now using HBM, because like I said they innovate & push their boundaries. However, Nvidia barely makes improvements & then charges wayyyy too much for what it is. I had so many issues with Nvidia drivers & windows 10 also, I'm a certified technician & I have to fix systems that have issues and it seems like Nvidia has been slacking on their compatibility with Windows 10, leaving their customers to fix the issues themselves. I use video cards from both companies just like I use CPU's from Intel & AMD, it really comes down to price to performance ratio & I'm not going to spend 33% more on a card that only gives a 5% to 10% performance increase. But you douches can drop to your knees & suck whatever companies dick you want to..... LOL
So long as these guys keep slugging it out we all win. I remember this blurb at the start of an article not long ago and it's an eye opener. Love or hate, we win when there is competition: "The $399 R9 290 made NVIDIA look comically evil for asking $999 for the card it beat, the GTX TITAN; while the R9 290X remained the fastest single-GPU option, at $550, till NVIDIA launched the $699 GTX 780 Ti, to get people back to paying through their noses for the extra performance. Then there were two UFO sightings in the form of the GTX TITAN Black, and the GTX TITAN-Z, which made no tangible contributions to consumer choice. Sure, they gave you full double-precision floating point (DPFP) performance, but DPFP is of no use to gamers." - Techpowerup, June 2015 Then the price points for superior performance continued to drop. AWESOME!! Long live market dynamics!
Well... from the first DX12 benches it seems that AMD will get a bigger boost than Nvidia, due to async.
I'm also stuck with a 720p tn monitor, so all that VRAM won't matter for a few months anyways :P
I'm going to get the 970 only because I live in Texas, and where I'll be gaming it'll be 90+ degrees fahrenheit (Yes, indoors. My room is above the garage, next to the "attic", and exposed on the left and top to heat.) Sorry AMD, but I can't bear adding more heat when I'm already soaking with sweat.
Tough choice based on performance but if you're looking for a DX12 card then the Nvidia is the winner between the two.
Support the underdog. Competition is good for the market.
comments powered by Disqus