GTX 780, 970 and R9 290 reliability issues

[Haduken21]

Hello, I'm currently buying components about a new PC and my biggest issue is the graphics card.
I'm between this GTX 780:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121779

This R9 290:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202080&cm_re=r9_290-_-14-202-080-_-Product

And this GTX 970:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...yMark=False&IsFeedbackTab=true#scrollFullInfo

I know that the 970 is the best in terms of performance, but the EVGA is the only one available right now (and I have to buy it in the next few days) and there were some issues with a possible defect (http://www.eteknix.com/evga-gtx-970-feature-manufacturing-defect/) and also there are many reports about the 970's coil whine.

The R9 290 is cheaper than the 780 (and has some games free) and probably a bit better (or at the same level), but I've seen some newegg reviews with black screen problems.

The 780 seems the one with the least problems, but it's probably the worst in terms of price/performance.

I don't overclock, I do play games and I don't have a monitor that will currently support anything higer than 1080p. Which one could prove the best long-term solution?

 

[Durvelle27]

Do you care about efficiency

 

[Haduken21]

Do you care about efficiency

I do, it's an important factor. I believe that in performance terms each one of them would be a huge leap for me (I own a HD 5700 now), so efficiency is important.
However, I did read a huge amount of user comments and I'm a bit scared with all the issues I've seen.
I know that usually people having problems are the ones that post and write, but it seems to me that problems like black screens or coil whines are a bit too common.

 

[Naito]

Any one would do for 1080P. R290 is slightly less efficient (you may not notice it), but is a decent alternative to the GTX 780. The GTX 970 would arguably give you the most longevity in regards to future games, APIs (not entirely known yet), etc, also most performance per dollar spent.

 

[OneMoar]

there is no defect its fine

 

[rtwjunkie]

They are all fine, and any of the 3 will give you over the top performance at 1080p!

 

[Durvelle27]

For price alone the R9 290

For efficiency/performance GTX 970

 

[GreiverBlade]

For price alone the R9 290

For efficiency/performance GTX 970

^that indeed

i run a 290 and it's top notch for 1080p (albeit a bit overkill) tho i would gladely reduce the wattage needed for a 970 instead.

 

[droopyRO]

For 40 $ i would go for a gtx970 but if you are on a tight budget and/or want those free games get a 290 but have a good 500W PSU.

 

[Haduken21]

Cold you make an estimate regarding the longevity of these cards?
I know this is not easy, but how long will each one of them will last?
I'm not in the habit of upgrading often so I'd like to know if for example one could last 1-2 years more.
If it's possible to predict something like that.

 

[64K]

Cold you make an estimate regarding the longevity of these cards?
I know this is not easy, but how long will each one of them will last?
I'm not in the habit of upgrading often so I'd like to know if for example one could last 1-2 years more.
If it's possible to predict something like that.

Owners of EVGA GTX 970s are also posting about issues with the cheap parts that they are using. How much weight you give to owner reviews is up to you. If you have to buy right now then the R9 290 and GTX 780 are both good cards and should be good for two years but if you want to play ultra at 1080p then bear in mind that games are getting VRAM hungry so the 290 might be a better choice for the next two years.

 

[Vayra86]

Cold you make an estimate regarding the longevity of these cards?
I know this is not easy, but how long will each one of them will last?
I'm not in the habit of upgrading often so I'd like to know if for example one could last 1-2 years more.
If it's possible to predict something like that.

Well generally speaking, a GPU will last you longer than it generally remains a useful part in your config. Think 5-7 years until they actually start degrading (the chip itself). There are many stories about very old cards that are being 'baked' in an oven just to make them last a bit longer - these are cards so old that the soldering is actually falling off and baking it will add another year or so.

So the longevity of the GPU is really a very personal matter. If you are a demanding gamer that wants to be on the bleeding edge longevity will be much lower than the actual life expectancy of the card. If you're not it may last you longer than most other components. However on the lower-mid range of cards and for many offerings that are 'the lowest priced' version of a certain GPU you will find that parts of the assembly AROUND the chip are weak or untrustworthy, in that case you may find yourself replacing fans, replacing the cooler altogether, reapplying heatsinks and other stuff. If you buy into the high end with non-reference cooling solutions, it is hard to find bad components but they do exist, recently EVGA has shown this (which is relatively new to that company) and on the other hand brands like MSI and Asus are actively marketing higher grade parts on their cooling solution and PCB.

Another reason longevity is very personal is because one guy uses that GPU at 50 degrees for two hours per day while the other runs it at 80+ C for six to eight hours per day. Personally I would say: be as picky as you can be and use all the available info to make a sensible choice. Reviews + benches + listening to the cooler at work in a case (one 35 dB card may sound completely different from another that is just as loud) + experiences from owners' clubs.

 

[Haduken21]

Thanks guys. I'm not that a demanding gamer. By "longevity" I really meant not if the card will fail which as Vayra said will depend on many factors, but how much it will last performing in a satisfactory way.
That may mean not Ultra but Medium to High settings (for me at last). I believe I can make it up to 2-3 years, at least until the new consoles come around and games may step it up a notch.
I think I will go with the R290 R9 Tri-X OC after all.
The 970s are out of stock and I'm a bit thoughtful about getting an EVGA.
The tri-x seems to be less noisy and with the 3 fans it will probably not reach very high temperatures.
I know that the 40-50$ is not much, but I'm actually getting a whole new PC so the budget is a bit tight.

 

[Vayra86]

That's the thing though, if you look at Star Citizen for example, which is early in development process, we are seeing a GTX 770 'just' capable of Medium. But if you were to buy that card today it would run 90% of games at ultra with 4x AA. Most games right now are becoming more demanding of high VRAM which is directly due to the new consoles that have 6 GB or so at their disposal. This allows developers to include more texture info in their games, or makes them more lazy when it comes to optimizing so the package 'fits' inside a 2 GB VRAM budget (which is mainstream at this time). There is really no telling what the next few years will do to the GPU market and to graphics in games, as PC gaming is also becoming somewhat more popular and indie developers are more and more likely to push the envelope (Star Citizen = prime example, the game has a scope similar to what Crysis 1 had graphics' wise).

So, bottom line: longevity is personal. If you go high end, invest in 4GB-6GB VRAM which will severely limit choices. If you can sit it out for a while still or if you want to seriously look at affordable 4K / 3K gaming, wait a bit because things are just now shaping up for that market to get bigger.

The best approach to me personally is to look at what games you can and want to play right NOW and see what they need to max out on 60 fps. That's your aim. Nobody can predict what gaming looks like in X years and nobody should. There is always a market for your used high-end GPU.

 

[RealNeil]

The two EVGA GTX-680s that I just sold to a friend were almost three years old and still working great. Also, I plan to buy two EVGA GTX-970s within the next month or so.
I have had several EVGA GPUs over the years. I know that they have really good tech support, and that they stand behind what they sell.
I think that any existing problems with the 970s will be fixed pretty quickly.

Of the three cards you mentioned, the 970 is the better performer and uses less power too.
Price and efficiency should be your consideration since they all perform well. At the resolution that you plan to use, any of them would be a good experience.

 

[moocow0463]

i just recently got my gtx970 and it doesn't dissapoint, i have the EVGA super clock and it will run 1290-1300 clock speed @ 80 degrees on the reference cooler. some people have reported better temps then me, this is just what i have monitored/recorded while playing archeage. its a great card and i cant wait to get a water block for it.