GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of R9 390 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

No winner declared

Too close to call

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 390

Reasons to consider the
AMD Radeon R9 390

Report a correction
Significantly more memory 8,192 MB vs 4,096 MB 2x more memory
Better floating-point performance 5,120 GFLOPS vs 3,494 GFLOPS More than 45% better floating-point performance
Higher texture rate 160 GTexel/s vs 109.2 GTexel/s More than 45% higher texture rate
Significantly better bitcoin mining score 607.33 mHash/s vs 189.44 mHash/s Around 3.2x better bitcoin mining score
More shading units 2,560 vs 1,664 896 more shading units
More texture mapping units 160 vs 104 56 more texture mapping units
More render output processors 64 vs 56 8 more render output processors
Wider memory bus 512 bit vs 256 bit 2x wider memory bus
Front view of GeForce GTX 970

Reasons to consider the
Nvidia GeForce GTX 970

Report a correction
Better PassMark score 8,619 vs 7,535 Around 15% better PassMark score
Higher effective memory clock speed 7,012 MHz vs 6,000 MHz More than 15% higher effective memory clock speed
Significantly higher bioshock infinite framerate 112.8 vs 59 More than 90% higher bioshock infinite framerate
Higher memory clock speed 1,753 MHz vs 1,500 MHz More than 15% higher memory clock speed
Significantly lower TDP 148W vs 275W More than 45% lower TDP
Slightly better PassMark direct compute score 4,332 vs 3,703 More than 15% better PassMark direct compute score

Benchmarks Real world tests of Radeon R9 390 vs GeForce GTX 970

Bitcoin mining Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 390
607.33 mHash/s
GeForce GTX 970
189.44 mHash/s

Face detection Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 390
117.2 mPixels/s
GeForce GTX 970
100.63 mPixels/s

Ocean surface simulation Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 390
3,163.59 frames/s
GeForce GTX 970
1,202.95 frames/s

Fire Strike Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Sky Diver Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Cloud Gate Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Bioshock Infinite

Metro: Last Light

Reviews Word on the street

Radeon R9 390  vs GeForce GTX 970 

8.6
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

Read more

Comments

Showing 25 comments.
its still the same chip. just revamped. AMd clearly told people this at CES 2016. Your comment is also correct.
Why is it always bias? I read a lot of comparisons, I'd say there is an AMD bias..... where is this bias TOWARDS Nvidia, that you speak of? The GTX is the winner..... The r9 390, may be more powerful in many areas, but it's more expensive, and the gtx 970, despite being "less" in many ways, produces higher frame rates.
the temp in r9 390 is not that low also, the stat here is wrong
Hey , What about GTA5, Battlefield 4 etc. R9 390 performs better in these games as compared to the GTX 970
I feel like I'm biased toards Nvidia even though I respect AMD far more as a company
59 FPS on bioshock was it tested with Vsync I had more than that on r9 270X
so in other words a refresh a rebrand means it would be the same card with minor chipset improvements not x2 the vram and all that extra power you get with the 390
yeah also i dont see the power consumption as a factor its a negligible difference imo it would take a few months of life full load to make a real difference on your power bill and i agree with you also i dont like biast ratings at all has to be impartial
Okay, but remember that GPUboss is flawed in every single way. It's nowhere near as good as www.userbenchmark.com
They actually did make the first dedicated gpu; the GeForce 256.
honestly the 390 performs well despite the heat and if your botherd about a few dollars on your bill each month then i dont see how you can afford a PC in the first place that sounded really harsh lol its not im just indicating for people reading just in case haha
No, it is equal at 4K, which is where they excel. Read the article if you didn't.
You're slightly wrong. It is technically the spiritual successor to the 290, as some features of it are very VERY similar imo
I wouldn't stretch the truth that far, my friend. It's cheaper than a 980, therefore it is slower. I would say it's a close runner-up, but it doesn't beat it.
do people know the difference between power consumption and heat? can you really be that stupid ? http://www.legitreviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Sapphire-Nitro-380-390-Charts-Temps.jpg
Maxwell cards OC better than GCN as of now. You can buy factory overclocked Maxwell GPUs at 1.2GHz.
That's TDP, not average usage.
TBH: the people parroting the stories about the Nvidia drivers crashing some systems is done by AMD fan boys. It might be blown out of proportion (as was done with ATI/AMD back in the day)
Well, look at their CompuBench 1.5 scores and compare them to this: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1594?vs=1595 Same trend. Differences section simply lists data points on each card. People are so upset about minuscule differences in a gpuboss score. Then then they go and mention other sites where the same thing is shown that is shown here. Here are two answers from Tom's which basically say buy whichever is cheaper: http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-2800413/390-gtx-970.html http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-2707555/390-geforce-gtx-970.html
well, both sides have advantages, and disadvantages, nvidia is more power efficient, but too expensive....on the other hand, amd is too power consumer, but cheaper....and the performance on both brands is more or less the same....
I don't need to. Because my point is pretty clear and maybe you should use some common sense to get what I said. Dumb kid.
lol you cant think asychronously.
The power difference is massive and it's in favor of Nvidia. Even if the performance was similar, the performance per watt is so different. It's almost like using a beefed up older technology on the AMD side (judging from the power efficiency comparison).
bullshit comparison don't buy gtx 970 http://i.imgur.com/Wcq4OBo.gif
This is a pathetic website.
comments powered by Disqus