GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of R9 390X vs 970 among Desktop GPUs


Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 21 more


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


Face Detection, Ocean Surface Simulation and 3 more

Performance per Watt

Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more


Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more

Noise and Power

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


Overall Score

AMD Radeon R9 390X 

GPUBoss recommends the AMD Radeon R9 390X  based on its benchmarks.

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!

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Radeon R9 390X

Reasons to consider the
AMD Radeon R9 390X

Report a correction
Significantly more memory 8,192 MB vs 4,096 MB 2x more memory
Significantly better floating-point performance 5,914 GFLOPS vs 3,494 GFLOPS Around 70% better floating-point performance
Significantly higher texture rate 184.8 GTexel/s vs 109.2 GTexel/s Around 70% higher texture rate
Better 3DMark06 score 17,944 vs 15,071 Around 20% better 3DMark06 score
Significantly more shading units 2,816 vs 1,664 1152 more shading units
Significantly more texture mapping units 176 vs 104 72 more texture mapping units
Much wider memory bus 512 bit vs 256 bit 2x wider memory bus
Higher pixel rate 67.2 GPixel/s vs 58.8 GPixel/s Around 15% higher pixel rate
More render output processors 64 vs 56 8 more render output processors
Higher crysis 3 framerate 56.1 fps vs 50.6 fps More than 10% higher crysis 3 framerate
Front view of GeForce GTX 970

Reasons to consider the
Nvidia GeForce GTX 970

Report a correction
Higher effective memory clock speed 7,012 MHz vs 6,000 MHz More than 15% higher effective memory clock speed
Higher memory clock speed 1,753 MHz vs 1,500 MHz More than 15% higher memory clock speed
Better cloud gate factor score 22.23 vs 21.17 More than 5% better cloud gate factor score
Significantly lower TDP 148W vs 275W More than 45% lower TDP

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

Bitcoin mining Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 390X
683.57 mHash/s
GeForce GTX 970
212.39 mHash/s

Face detection Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 390X
114.29 mPixels/s
GeForce GTX 970
105.04 mPixels/s

Ocean surface simulation Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 390X
2,911.86 frames/s
GeForce GTX 970
1,225.93 frames/s

Fire Strike Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Sky Diver Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Cloud Gate Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Battlefield 4

Reviews Word on the street

Read more


Showing 25 comments.
So my 390x cost now $700 ? GO AMD GOOOO !!!!!!
i have this card and he is a beast i play like every game on 1440 high 60 fps i love it
They certainly mean a thing. But if there is only 4gigs of VRAM there is only so much that a card can do. At 4k it's going to make gaming way less cost efficient than an 8gig or more videocard.
it's not the number of monitors that matters. Its total resolution (pixel count) that really matters. VR uses lower res than a single 4K monitor I guess.
The fury x beat the titan x, and the fury x2 destroy nvidia.
Shit this is a hard decision. They're priced about the same, have very similar performance and overall have a lot in common. Gonna be hard to choose which one.
You're poor
i have a 390x and gtx 960 and tbh guys, its all about optimization and drivers, its easdier to tweak gta v on my 960 to get 60 fps on GTA V while my 390x seems to always drop to 40-60 when driving, and fallout 4 pure ultra 1440p runs amazing (except for the infamous corverga) except gameworks looked a bit better on the 960, how good all these cards are is determined by the graphics vendor, and the efforts of the game developers, understand that nvidia allows developers to optimize games for rivals, with limits, but legally amd cant run gameworks, but they're more than capable to do so, nvidia gets higher framerates due to devs prioritizing their own tech due to the branding of their games, but its not all because nvidia has games favor their tech at many times, yet AMD needs to start striving for better drivers, java games like minecraft or spiral knights have awful awful framerates compared to NV cards and thats just not right
Hey look a unicorn.........
Well having built 3 rig of Nvidia , I'm now with the 7970 ghz BEOC msi and i don't miss Nvidia that much, and if u keep an eye every console now own an amd :D and don't txt is a matter of $$$ because i think Nvidia sometimes overprices. Indeed i like both if u got a lot of $$$$ go nvidia a lot feature like shield , streaming and ect if not u will still be very happy with AMD :D
That is why AMD is moving towards HBM and increasing speed rather than the capacity of VRAM...
So, you are saying that pixel rate, floating point performance, shading units, texture mapping units and render output processors don't mean anything ?
Because AMD is partnering with almost all the games that will be using DX12. And in general it has better DX12 support.
So true.
You guys at GPUBOSS are obviously biased towards Nvidia regardless of the Benchmarks. I wouldn't doubt that a new AMD Video Card could trounce a new Nvidia card by 60% in every benchmark and you would still declare Nvidia the winner. The benchmark Radeon R9 390X vs GeForce GTX 970 clearly shows this. AMD smoked the Nvidia in all the benchmarks. Are you guys blind or do you just hate to admit that AMD can actually win when your own results show it? How about it GPUBOSS? Any comments?
Wait, how is 4gigs of vram future proof? For 4k they're basically useless as of now compared to a 290x or 390x with 8gb of vram. I prefer nvidia myself because the rest of all the aspects are better, but vram is a problem.
I think 6GB wouldve been a better bet with the 390x, i just dont see m yself using more than 3Gigs on fallout 4 maxed 1080 lol
AMD is preparing with Polaris GPU architecture. AMD has amped up and gone really aggressive in the CPU and GPU industry by announcing Zen and Polaris against Intel and NVIDIA respectively....
but you do know that amd will bring out a new series too ?
Wait until Pascal comes out and destroys the 300 series just like the 900 blew away the 200 series. The most important factor in this category is the in-game performance. You can have any numbers on paper, but if it doesn't translate into performance, it's useless. An OC'd 980 gives about 9 to 10 percent higher framerates in most games than an OC'd 390x. It also runs cooler, quieter and is much more futureproof with most power supply, since it doesn't require a personal power plant to run at full efficiency /s
I'm not an NVidia Fanboy, but I have been using their cards for ages. My last card was a GTX970 (emphasis on last), because I think NVidia got caught with their pants down as far as DirectX 12, and Mantle goes. So my new card is going to be a 390X i guess.
No memory stack in DirectX 12 using the current hardware. PCIE is too slow.
One reason is because Maxwell does not support Asynchronous Compute. Also DirectX 12 is skewed towards the GCN feature set, because the XBox One uses AMD.
Why is Dx 12 going to blow away Nvidia..?
My buddy with 2x Titan'x cards and a i7 5960x 4.5ghz plays GTA 5 maxed out with 8xMSAA and advance settings at well above 60fps..... I know, because I built it and benched it.... Not sure, though the graph is for a totally different game, different engine, everything.
comments powered by Disqus