High-end build - gtx970 vs r9 390

[Mustkunstn1k]

Hey guys, I'm thinking of putting together a new gaming PC. I have a 1920x1200 monitor and I don't plan on upgrading that any time soon (so this build would be for that resolution).

I have a budget of around 1000€ (I'm from Estonia so it might be hard for you guys to suggest alternatives - the site I will probably order from will be either www.1a.ee[1] or www.arvutitark.ee[2] ).

I have a 1TB HDD already so I only need a SSD. I was thinking either 250GB or 500GB. But seeing how big new games are and I really hate worrying about space I'm thinking maybe I'll just pay the extra for the 500 one.

The big question is the gpu - the obvious choice here is either 970 or the r9 390. Now I know a lot of people here will probably say that the 390 is the obvious choice (similar performance atm but more future-proof with 8GB and it might work better with dx12). But I'm also a little bit afraid seeing how nvidia has way more market-share and will probably have better support.

Everything else I picked on my own, any changes are welcome (just tell me a component, I can check the prices then).

I have put together two similar builds, one with 970 from 1a.ee the other with 390 from arvutitark.ee

CURRENT BUILD (R9 390):

• GPU: SAPPHIRE VGA PCIE16 R9 390 8GB GDDR5/NITRO 11244-01-20G SAPPHIRE (356€)
  
• CPU: Intel® Core™ i5-6600K Processor (6M Cache, up to 3.90 GHz) Tray (259€)
• Mobo: ASUS MB H170 S1151 MATX/H170M-PLUS ASUS (101€)
• RAM: Kingston HyperX FURY 8GB(Kit of 2) 2666MHz DDR4 (60€)
• SSD: Crucial SSD BX100 500GB SATA3 (172€)
  
• PSU: Fortron FSP700-50ARN 700W 88+ (67€)
• Case: Aerocool V3X Advance Black Edition Midi-Tower (30€)

Total : 1044€

----

OPTIONAL GTX970 BUILD:

• GPU: MSI GF GTX970 4GB GDDR5 PCIE (381€)
  
• CPU: Intel® Core™ i5-6600 3.3GHz 6MB LGA1151 (240€)
  
• Mobo: ASUS H170M-PLUS (101€)
  
• RAM: Kingston 8GB PC17000 DDR4/FURY HyperX (56€)
• SSD: CRUCIAL BX100 SSD 500GB SATA III (177€)
• PSU: FORTRON FSP RAIDER 550 ATX2.31 88+ (61€)
  
• Case: COOLER MASTER ELITE 241 (26€)

Total: 1042€

ORIGINAL R9 390 BUILD:

• GPU: SAPPHIRE VGA PCIE16 R9 390 8GB GDDR5/NITRO 11244-01-20G SAPPHIRE (356€)
  
• CPU: Intel® Core™ i5-6600K Processor (6M Cache, up to 3.90 GHz) Tray (259€)
• Mobo: ASUS MB H170 S1151 MATX/H170M-PLUS ASUS (101€)
• RAM: Kingston HyperX FURY must 8GB 1866MHz DDR3L CL11 DIMM 1.35V (46€)
• SSD: Crucial SSD BX100 500GB SATA3 (172€)
  
• PSU: Fortron FSP RAIDER 550W 88+ (62€)
• Case: Cooler Master Force 251 (26€)

Total: 1021€

 

[Aquinus]

I can't say for the 970 but, I like my 390. I suggest though, getting a better quality PSU as the 390 can consume a lot of power. My 3820 and 390 together will consume more than 500 watts off the wall at full tilt. The ~30 euro price difference for the 970 probably isn't worth it, even more so since you wouldn't get a K edition CPU out of the deal. The 390 build looks better but, I would try to opt for a better PSU. Word of warning about the 390, it's a big card. Just make sure it will fit in the chassis before making a purchase.

 

[BarbaricSoul]

FSP makes decent PSUs @Aquinus

Personally, I'd take the 390 route also. The 390 is equal to the 970 in performance at 1080p and starts to outperform the 970 as higher resolutions are used. I also prefer the K cpu. But you really ought to get a Z170 chipset motherboard instead of the H170 board you have listed to allow for OC'ing

 

[Mustkunstn1k]

I found this Fortron FSP700-50ARN 700W 88+ for 67€ which is basically the same price. How about that? Everything else seems kind of too expensive.

I also did some extra research and found that the Sapphire r9 390 is 308 mm long. For Cooler Master Force 251 it says that the card length is 245 mm. I found this Aerocool V3X Advance Black Edition Midi-Tower for 30€ though and it says here that it's gpu clearance is 320mm so I think it should be good right?

As of now I'm thinking I'm not going to OC and to be honest I would actually prefer it to be a bit cheaper. Can I maybe change something out to drop the price a little?

I also switched the DDR3 memory (was supposed to be DDR4 like in the 970 build) to two sticks of 4GB DDR4, which should be faster than one stick, right?

Anyway, the current build would look like this:

• GPU: SAPPHIRE VGA PCIE16 R9 390 8GB GDDR5/NITRO 11244-01-20G SAPPHIRE (356€)
  
• CPU: Intel® Core™ i5-6600K Processor (6M Cache, up to 3.90 GHz) Tray (259€)
• Mobo: ASUS MB H170 S1151 MATX/H170M-PLUS ASUS (101€)
• RAM: Kingston HyperX FURY 8GB(Kit of 2) 2666MHz DDR4 (60€)
• SSD: Crucial SSD BX100 500GB SATA3 (172€)
  
• PSU: Fortron FSP700-50ARN 700W 88+ (67€)
• Case: Aerocool V3X Advance Black Edition Midi-Tower (30€)

Total : 1044€

 

[vega22]

you want more ram dude.

your system should have more ram than your gpu

 

[Mustkunstn1k]

Well in that case I'll just get the 970 and problem solved?

In all seriousness, I don't really see the point in more than 8GB of RAM at the moment. I have yet to see a single game that has over 8GB under it's recommended settings and I don't use that much on my own anyway. Besides, the good thing about RAM is that it's so easily upgradable. I can get another 8GB stick (or 2x4GB) down the line.

 

[MIRTAZAPINE]

By the way the ram should be ddr4 since this is a skylake build.

 

[Mustkunstn1k]

Yeah, I accidentally messed up and put the ddr3 ones. I now have 2 sticks of 4GB ddr4. I've updated the original post with the most current build.

 

[rtwjunkie]

I say get the 390 for 1440p. The idea is you want max quality at max performance. The 970 is a great card and can do this at 1080p all day, but will start to fall short at 1440p if it hasn't already in some games. Besides...8 gb of vram will come in real handy at that resolution!

As to RAM, we're almost to the 8GB to 16 GB threshhold. I never recommend anyone less than 16 that I build for. If you can get 16 for a reasonable price, do it, since you take a chance adding another 8 when you decide you need it.

 

[rooivalk]

Similar to my thread.

Things to consider buying 390:
1. What is your games? there are quite few games that leaning toward nVidia such as Project CARS, ARK, or Witcher 3 (all popular games). In case of Project CARS and ARK, the difference is relatively huge for me.
2. You can't use 4K TV at 60Hz with 390. TV (not monitor) always comes with HDMI 2.0 not DisplayPort and 390 (or Fury) only comes with HDMI 1.4. There's no working adapter as far as I know.
3. Power consumption and heat ejected to your room (not card temperature).
4. 8GB VRAM only usable in niche situation (such as heavily modded inefficient 4 years old game xD)

Things to consider buying 970:
1. On average, it has less performance than 390
2. Available in mini form factor
3. More overclockable. OC vs OC I think 970 is better especially at 1080p
4. There are game promo with nVidia lately, MGS or something.

 

[RejZoR]

Get the R9-390X. GTX 970 is garbage. It has wonky memory and doesn't really perform all that great even compared to older generations of Radeons. And when you're buying high end you don't realyl give a shit about power consumption. Lower heat output won't really help you much if the card is kinda crap even when overclocked... If you have to, GTX 980, because it's the only one which is basically on par with R9-390X...

 

[Flow]

Your current build looks fine except for the motherboard, get a Z one instead. If you get an unlocked cpu you'd better also get a good oc'ing board with it.
If you're short for money you can always skimp some off from your other choices like the ssd,
better to run it from a Barracuda 2TB plus faster motherboard, and get the ssd at a later stage.
If you're not into overclocking, you could take the non K cpu and perhaps some 3000+ ram?

 

[That Guy In The Shirt]

Get the R9-390X. GTX 970 is garbage. It has wonky memory and doesn't really perform all that great even compared to older generations of Radeons. And when you're buying high end you don't realyl give a shit about power consumption. Lower heat output won't really help you much if the card is kinda crap even when overclocked... If you have to, GTX 980, because it's the only one which is basically on par with R9-390X...

As someone who owns two GTX 970s, I agree with this guy. Don't get me wrong, the GTX 970 is a great product, and I love my 970s. However, I've found that when playing incredibly demanding titles I can't max out everything at 1440p. Most games I can, but every now and again there'll be one where I either can't max it out all the way, or I experience random frame dips enough that I just lower some settings to prevent it. Crysis 3 for instance has been a real annoyance of mine, because I spent a ton on my parts so that I could max out anything at 1440p, but because of the GTX 970s VRAM issues that RejZoR pointed out, I get random frame rates from 30-60 fps, whereas if I lower some settings from very high to high, I'm fine. Just saying, if you want best performance in games, the r9 390 is gonna do you better. Though at 1080p it wouldn't be a significant difference at this point.

 

[Atrox]

Plenty of benchmarks favor the 390. Of course we play games not benchmarks and if you look at those more often than not the 970 is ahead. If you move up to higher resolutions the 390 would be ahead.

 

[That Guy In The Shirt]

Plenty of benchmarks favor the 390. Of course we play games not benchmarks and if you look at those more often than not the 970 is ahead. If you move up to higher resolutions the 390 would be ahead.

Yeah that's certainly true. Again I certainly think the GTX 970 is a great product, especially at 1080p that's where it shines. But I tend to suggest AMD at that price range specifically because of VRAM problems. After all, as time goes by resolutions are gonna continue to get bigger, and games are gonna require more VRAM regardless of which resolution becomes the next standard.

And welcome to Techpowerup.com by the way Atrox

 

[RejZoR]

GTX 970 is pretty much never ahead of R9-390X. I mean, R)-390X is most of the time on par with GTX 980, sometimes even faster. GTX 970 is more like R9-380X...

 

[CounterZeus]

GTX 970 is pretty much never ahead of R9-390X. I mean, R)-390X is most of the time on par with GTX 980, sometimes even faster. GTX 970 is more like R9-380X...

OP is talking about a 390 non-X, not the 390X, which is clearly ahead of the GTX970.

 

[ne6togadno]

you are missing cpu cooler. skylake cpus come w/o stock cooler.

or with atx mb

 

[NC37]

If you plan to upgrade in a year, 970. If you want more than a few years out of your card, 390.

The 3.5GB limit is already causing problems right now and it'll only be worse later. You can't define 1080 gaming as being sub 4GB forever. Its the same nonsense people spewed about 1GB, 512MB, 256MB, and so on.

As far as DX12 goes, neither is 100% DX12 all the way. If you want those, you'll want to wait a year till the next gen comes out.