Which to keep?: Gigabyte G1 970 vs. MSI Lightning 290X

[ninjacore]

This is a tough one for me. I have both cards already. MSI Lightning R9 290X and a Gigabyte G1 Gaming GTX 970.

Rest of the PC it'll be going in:

1440P display
4690K
Z87 Hero
8GB 2133Mhz
850 EVO
AX860

This is just for gaming: BF4 primarily, but I usually try just about everything

I paid within $25 of the same price for both of them, so I don't think cost factors in too much (although, I would imagine the 970 will hold its value longer?).

Granted, my testing so far isn't anything near scientific, but in BF4 multiplayer and in 3DMark bench runs, they are extremely close, performance-wise.

They also both overclock very well. I was able to bench and play Battlefield at the following settings:

Lightning 290X - 1225Mhz core, 1450Mhz mem

G1 970 - +155 core, +500 mem (which, after boost, yields 1547Mhz on the core and 2000Mhz on the memory)

I maxed out the voltage offset and power limit sliders for these clocks. I may be able to lower them, but I didn't get that far in testing. Just wanted to see max game-stable clocks of each card.

Card|Stock/OC|Test|Avg FPS|Min FPS|Score
290X|Stock|BF4 - Siege of Shanghai|69|35|N/A
290X|OC|BF4 - Siege of Shanghai|75|39|N/A
970|Stock|BF4 - Siege of Shanghai|71|45|N/A
970|OC|BF4 - Siege of Shanghai|82|49|N/A
290X|Stock|BF4 - Dawnbreaker|75|49|N/A
290X|OC|BF4 - Dawnbreaker|85|57|N/A
970|Stock|BF4 - Dawnbreaker|75|48|N/A
970|OC|BF4 - Dawnbreaker|86|56|N/A
290X|Stock|BF4 - Rogue Transmission|72|57|N/A
290X|OC|BF4 - Rogue Transmission|80|54|N/A
970|Stock|BF4 - Rogue Transmission|71|39|N/A
970|OC|BF4 - Rogue Transmission|77|35|N/A
290X|Stock|Firestrike|N/A|N/A|9745
290X|OC|Firestrike|N/A|N/A|10633
970|Stock|Firestrike|N/A|N/A|9591
970|OC|Firestrike|N/A|N/A|10581

Ignoring the aspects they have in common:

290X PROS:
+unlocked voltage with the LN2 bios, so I could possibly push it further
+Mantle

970 PROS:
+~1/2 power draw
+a bit more quiet when overclocked (stock, they're pretty similar)
+higher "street" value in 6 months
+MFAA
+newer card, so more driver releases forthcoming which could improve performance

guru3d has reviewed both cards:
970 link
290x link

Contrary to my "tests" (which, again, aren't as balanced as professional reviews), that site puts the 290X ahead in every game except Bioshock Infinite. I'm guessing the initial 970 drivers were not so great?

So, my question is:

Is there anything I'm not considering? I'm leaning toward the 970. Is that the right choice?

THANKS!

 

[Witchdoctor]

I would keep the 970 based on very close performance at 1/2 the draw

This opens the door for a second with out needing an insane power supply.

 

[caddi daddi]

+1 witchy, the other plus is dx12.

 

[Woomack]

Also new drivers will improve performance on GTX900 series while 290x is already old card and barely anything will change. Sell it before price drops even more.

 

[Witchdoctor]

What does it do ?

 

[ninjacore]

I think they're both dx12. (still leaning toward the 970, though)

 

[Woomack]

What does it do ?

If you mean new drivers then manufacturers usually improve performance of new cards for about a year and later they focus only on new series. You probably noticed that the fastest drivers for older gfx series are never last available drivers. Manufacturers ( both, AMD and Nvidia ) care to improve mainly new products so it helps to sell new cards.
Who would buy GTX980 if GTX780 would get 20% boost because of drivers. R9 290X is for a long time on the market so I doubt we will see any significant performance boost. Maybe single fixes for some games.

If you mean DX12 then it will let to improve performance and texture compression but also additional visual effects. In real we probably won't see any special changes till next generation of graphics cards and with delays I think that no faster than in 2 years. Each new DX has more changes on paper than we see in real as game developers are not using everything they could. With so many games designed for console market I doubt anyone will care to invest in DX12 for less popular games ( or maybe expected to be less popular ).

 

[EarthDog]

970 to me, hands down.

 

[Witchdoctor]

If you mean new drivers then manufacturers usually improve performance of new cards for about a year and later they focus only on new series. You probably noticed that the fastest drivers for older gfx series are never last available drivers. Manufacturers ( both, AMD and Nvidia ) care to improve mainly new products so it helps to sell new cards.
Who would buy GTX980 if GTX780 would get 20% boost because of drivers. R9 290X is for a long time on the market so I doubt we will see any significant performance boost. Maybe single fixes for some games.

If you mean DX12 then it will let to improve performance and texture compression but also additional visual effects. In real we probably won't see any special changes till next generation of graphics cards and with delays I think that no faster than in 2 years. Each new DX has more changes on paper than we see in real as game developers are not using everything they could. With so many games designed for console market I doubt anyone will care to invest in DX12 for less popular games ( or maybe expected to be less popular ).

LOL

No I meant the 290x as possibly interested in it.

core/memory clocks

The 290x lightning owns 03 & Heaven

 

[ATMINSIDE]

970 without question.

 

[Woomack]

LOL

No I meant the 290x as possibly interested in it.

core/memory clocks

The 290x lightning owns 03 & Heaven

not all are only playing 3DMarks

If you turn off tessellation then 290X is good in all new tests. If you turn it on then not so much.
03 base mainly on CPU power. I made nearly 200k on GTX970 in 03 so it's not so big difference.
Personally I would keep GTX970 and later move to 390X when it will be available. I actually have GTX970 and I wait for 390X ... or 980Ti, whatever will be first.

 

[ninjacore]

Thanks all. Sticking with the 970. I like that it's earlier in its release, so more driver performance improvements can be expected. 290X is probably near EOL on that area (not that we didn't see significant gains over the past year or so).

The noise difference is also quite noticeable when the two are overclocked. The 970 doesn't need the airflow the 290x does, so I can go matx