Upgrading my GPU Titan Black vs R9 295X2

[Beckers]

Hello everyone,

I am looking for a strong GPU for my newest build. Being a hardcore Nvidia fan, i find it hard to like the water cooled R9 - but the numbers are too attractive to ignore.

Higher bit memory, better RAM, better cooling (Push/Pull here i come!) and higher GPU clocks - at the same price tag (around a 1,700$ budget for the GPU).

I had bad experiences with AMD and ever since i'm a hardcore Intel/Nvidia fan.

The build is aimed towards gaming and will have the new x99 MB and 6 core i7 first thing in September.

Which direction would you go? - I'm open to new ideas such as SLI alternatives by the way!

[Ohmygonzo]

If you are interested in such high end components, you either know your hardware, or have a lot of money, or both

Anyway, the only way I can help you, is this, if you already did not see it yourself.

http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Radeon-R9-29...TX-TITAN-BLACK

[fixx]

You're looking into wrong cards...

On nVidia side 2x GTX780ti in SLI is roughly equal in price as the Radeon R9 295x2 but performs better. GTX Titan Black is 100% waste of money to buy for gaming.

[Purpleisbetter]

From what i've seen 295 is faster on 3d enviroments, while having a TDP of 500W.

Titan is not really made for gaming, its for those who actually work with their rig (3DSmax, CADs, stuff like that) but they can't be bothered to buy a nvidia quadro or ati firegl (if that exist, but you get my point) because in that case, those graphic cards would suck for gaming.
Titan is where both worlds (gaming and professional ) collide.

Maybe 2x 780 are infact better, but SLI (or XFIRE) doesn't mean 100% scalability/double performance.

[fixx]

Maybe 2x 780 are infact better, but SLI (or XFIRE) doesn't mean 100% scalability/double performance.

295x2 has internal crossfire between the two GPUs so it has the same scaling problems/benefits as SLI of 780ti's.

[BicycleMafioso]

GPU clocks matter little when going cross-brand comparisons.
Strictly speaking, the R9 295x2 is way better than the Titan Black. But in all honesty, this isn't a fight where either of them should participate. Titan Black is a cheaper compute card errenously labelled as a gaming card, highly overpriced and not worth the cost.
The R9 295x2 is a behemoth, the best graphics card on the market, but it's to be viewed like an engineering sample, the pinnacle of enthusiast hardware: "Because we can, but not because we should"-type of deal.
Not worth the hassle, but certainly far ahead of the Titan Black - for gaming.

The interesting 'fight' would be between the 290x and the 780 Ti for top performers, or 290x and 780 for price matchers, categories where the 290x is behind in the first, but ahead in the second.

[Stormspark]

You're looking into wrong cards...

On nVidia side 2x GTX780ti in SLI is roughly equal in price as the Radeon R9 295x2 but performs better. GTX Titan Black is 100% waste of money to buy for gaming.

This. The Titan Black IS a 780ti. The ONLY difference is that it has fully unlocked double precision. Games do not use this. This is only used for things like high end rendering and GPGPU stuff.

[Deleted]

Odd that no one has asked this yet but at which resolution will you be playing at and which type of games mainly?

Why are you opting for X99/i7?

Going for the most high end just because it's high end and you have money burning in your pocket isn't exactly or necessarily the most logical decision. Obviously it's your money and if you actually need (and of course want) all this go right ahead but at least share what you need it for, this will help recommending something.

[Deleted]

Wait until the September launch of the GTX880 before you decide - you'll likely get better futureproofing and save soem money in the process.

[Stormspark]

Odd that no one has asked this yet but at which resolution will you be playing at and which type of games mainly?

Why are you opting for X99/i7?

Going for the most high end just because it's high end and you have money burning in your pocket isn't exactly or necessarily the most logical decision. Obviously it's your money and if you actually need (and of course want) all this go right ahead but at least share what you need it for, this will help recommending something.

In addition, the i7-4790k is faster for gaming than any of the LGA2011's. My advice is, if you can't state a specific reason why you need LGA2011 (need 6 cores/12 threads for some task other than gaming, or absolutely need 3-4way SLI/Crossfire), then you don't need it.

I'm convinced that Intel is deliberately marketing LGA2011 the way they are as an idiot tax on people with too much money and not enough sense. I'm not saying that LGA2011 doesn't have its uses (it does), but generally not for gaming.

[Beckers]

First of all, thanks for all the replies!

I'm talking about having an option to spend more money than sense, and that is why i asked about the cards.
Right now the R9-295x2 seems like the front runner, i'm looking for sheer performance out of maximum of 2 cards (custom small case build).

This rig is supposed to run BF4 at higher than 1920x1080 resolutions, and of course some WoW (i know it's a CPU intensive game - it will have a CPU to back that up with a very high end cooing loop)

Having said that, does that change your pick?

[Sinyc]

First of all, thanks for all the replies!

I'm talking about having an option to spend more money than sense, and that is why i asked about the cards.
Right now the R9-295x2 seems like the front runner, i'm looking for sheer performance out of maximum of 2 cards (custom small case build).

This rig is supposed to run BF4 at higher than 1920x1080 resolutions, and of course some WoW (i know it's a CPU intensive game - it will have a CPU to back that up with a very high end cooing loop)

Having said that, does that change your pick?

Both of those cards are overkill. (and a waste of money for what you listed)

What is meant by greater than 1920x1080 resolution?

[Deleted]

AMD runs well, and its drivers are fine, really dunno where people get this from, Ive personally owned a few AMD cards from something years ago from gigabyte that was AMD, 5770 and then a 7970.
And I still say AMD are good and stable from my experience using a nvidia gpu now, but some stuff I have, Im using some cuda to help out among other things.

Also in fairness, in terms of driver problems, its the nvidia camp thats had more recent issues then AMD, both have inbuilt recording programs as well, well AMD is in beta, so really, upto you in what you use.

Pure gaming 295x, though you are only gonna get see any benefit from that if you are at least 2560x1440, anything below, and you wont notice anything, also to note, the 295x is also considered the coolest running card and the most quiet, even with its stock fan, though if I was spending that amount of money on that card I would stick a noctua fan on it straight away.

However, I dont think I can move from adaptive Vsync anytime soon, wish AMD had a native option for it.

But also, I agree with tenangrychickens, we are quite close to the new nvidia gpus coming out, not to mention AMDs new stuff, though the 285 has been announced, theres still more stuff to come out from the leaks.

[Sinyc]

AMD runs well, and its drivers are fine, really dunno where people get this from,

I have had some issues with random crashes, etc revolving around driver issues with my 7870GHz. Never had issues with my NVIDIA cards that i used for ~8 years before that.

There are also some oddities I see in WoW with "white dots" appearing in distant mountains/terrain that my previous GPU in this same system did not experience.

I'm sure people have issues with NVIDIA products too, but AMD is not as good with drivers as they should be (or as good as NVIDIA is currently IMO).

[BicycleMafioso]

I have had some issues with random crashes, etc revolving around driver issues with my 7870GHz. Never had issues with my NVIDIA cards that i used for ~8 years before that.
I'm sure people have issues with NVIDIA products too, but AMD is not as good with drivers as they should be (or as good as NVIDIA is currently IMO).

I am posting just to provide the other perspective:
I have never had a GeForce chip that didn't have trouble with both hardware AND drivers.

I have only had "one" (actually two HD6970 and HD6950 running in crossfire) AMD-card, but during my time having it, the only problems I had were user-inflicted.
I currently have a GTX 680, and I have finally, since I got the card in mid/late 2012 had three drivers in a row where neither were a total trainwreck. Before that, I often had several in a row. Now it's working without a hitch. Well, except the coil whine.

Despite this experience of mine, I will say that both companies probably have as many issues and faults. AMD was admittedly poor at doing drivers. For a while. This time has passed. They are still horrible at making nice user-friendly GUIs and programs, but the functions and drivers work great. If you can navigate their software that is.


That aside, I still think that the R9 295x2 should be matching against the Titan-Z, not the Titan Black Edition. Otherwise, it's not even going to be a close race.
If Black Edition versus the R9 295x2 is the actual and only "either or" scenario, the choice simply is that R9 295x2 has far more horsepower in games that can use both GPUs.
It also is more of a wonder in terms of engineering.
But, remember, I think Crossfire still doesn't always work in windows mode. I had trouble with this during the 6900-series at least.

The extra money spent on Titan Black over the GTX 780 Ti probably results in 0% gaming performance increases. When accounting for extra cooling and overcloking in aftermarket solutions for the latter, it's probably worse.
Please don't throw away money for the sake of it.

[Beckers]

I am posting just to provide the other perspective:
I have never had a GeForce chip that didn't have trouble with both hardware AND drivers.

I have only had "one" (actually two HD6970 and HD6950 running in crossfire) AMD-card, but during my time having it, the only problems I had were user-inflicted.
I currently have a GTX 680, and I have finally, since I got the card in mid/late 2012 had three drivers in a row where neither were a total trainwreck. Before that, I often had several in a row. Now it's working without a hitch. Well, except the coil whine.

Despite this experience of mine, I will say that both companies probably have as many issues and faults. AMD was admittedly poor at doing drivers. For a while. This time has passed. They are still horrible at making nice user-friendly GUIs and programs, but the functions and drivers work great. If you can navigate their software that is.


That aside, I still think that the R9 295x2 should be matching against the Titan-Z, not the Titan Black Edition. Otherwise, it's not even going to be a close race.
If Black Edition versus the R9 295x2 is the actual and only "either or" scenario, the choice simply is that R9 295x2 has far more horsepower in games that can use both GPUs.
It also is more of a wonder in terms of engineering.
But, remember, I think Crossfire still doesn't always work in windows mode. I had trouble with this during the 6900-series at least.

The extra money spent on Titan Black over the GTX 780 Ti probably results in 0% gaming performance increases. When accounting for extra cooling and overcloking in aftermarket solutions for the latter, it's probably worse.
Please don't throw away money for the sake of it.

Thanks for the time to write such a detailed answer!

The only reason the titan black was an option was because i didnt wanna leave camp green.

Right now the top contenders are the R9 and 780tix2. While the R9 is as you said much more impressive, but thought of having ATI interfaces on my machine makes me cringe.

[Deleted]

Just to keep something in mind regarding SLI vs Crossfire. Crossfire is a lot smoother at atleast 4K and I think also at other resolutions, regarding 290(x).

From [H]:

Today we can confidently state that AMD CrossFire is going to give you the better gameplay experience than SLI at 4K.

[Deleted]

That was a nice read Zeara but i am skeptical about it. They proved that more than 4gb VRAM isn't needed for 4k since they didn't see improvement. They also compare the 2 cards from a price perspective. Obviously R290X is better than a 780 no matter then price. Although the green cards used are 6gb (proved not needed) they should have at least compared to the usual 780ti's as well since those are on the same price as the 780 6gb ones.

[Deleted]

I know they used a 780 vs 290x, which is talking from a performance match up unfair (price atm seems more fair). But I didnt link it for the performance results regarding how much FPS they got etc. I linked it mainly for the difference between SLI and Crossfire.

And they concluded that (for 4k) crossfire wins it. Due to the new crossfire method of not using a bridge. Im not sure how it goes back to 1080p/1440p/1600p and triple screens. But I would say that for those resolutions crossfire will be better than SLI. And the OP is going above 1080p so I figured why not link it

[BicycleMafioso]

Meh, I'm a bit sceptical to the notion that you really need more than 3 at that resolution. Bus width however, yes. But they've proven that the 4GiB version of the GTX 680 performed the same as the 2GiB one even at 3x2560x1440.