bp9801 Posted March 29, 2015 Posted March 29, 2015 it is settled i will pick up another 290 Why pick up the second one now when you may sell it in a few months when the new AMD parts are out? If he waits even longer he can get the 490 Well I'm merely saying if he's already considering the R9 300 series, why not just hold out for that and see if it's the boost he's looking for. Nothing wrong with grabbing a second 290 now, but I would at least want to see what the 300 series offers before pulling the trigger. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puck Posted March 29, 2015 Posted March 29, 2015 I made the same decision. A single 390 won't be as fast as dual 290s, and we don't know enough about the unicorn 390x to make a decision. Unless you plan on waiting for months, its real hard to beat 2x290s for price:performance right now. AMD had a rough spot the last few months with driver releases as they prepared Freesync, leaving many of us dual card guys without crossfire support in games like Evolve and Dying Light. They have now said they will go back to more recent driver releases to address new games and crossfire profiles so hopefully they keep their word. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarWeeny Posted March 29, 2015 Posted March 29, 2015 I would personally never go for multi GPU set-ups. There are more hassles / problems and if your favourite game doesn't support it, you are out of luck. Not to mention the VRAM limitation you are going to get with only 4GB. There are already games who struggle with 4GB on 1080P, let alone 4K. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdm_freek Posted March 29, 2015 Posted March 29, 2015 (edited) it is settled i will pick up another 290 Why pick up the second one now when you may sell it in a few months when the new AMD parts are out? if 2 290's are just as powerful or close to it @ 4k why not stick with them Edited March 29, 2015 by jdm_freek Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdm_freek Posted March 29, 2015 Posted March 29, 2015 (edited) I would personally never go for multi GPU set-ups. There are more hassles / problems and if your favourite game doesn't support it, you are out of luck. Not to mention the VRAM limitation you are going to get with only 4GB. There are already games who struggle with 4GB on 1080P, let alone 4K. the gtx 960 sli does fantastic at 4k and only has 2gb vram vram is not as important when you have 2 gpu's sharing the load (properly) Edited March 29, 2015 by jdm_freek Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarWeeny Posted March 29, 2015 Posted March 29, 2015 I would personally never go for multi GPU set-ups. There are more hassles / problems and if your favourite game doesn't support it, you are out of luck. Not to mention the VRAM limitation you are going to get with only 4GB. There are already games who struggle with 4GB on 1080P, let alone 4K. the gtx 960 sli does fantastic at 4k and only has 2gb vram vram is not as important when you have 2 gpu's sharing the load (properly) Having 2 GPUs doesn't give you 4GB you know... Play some new gen games on 4K on that 2GB card and you will soon see it stutters like crazy. Watchdogs (max textures) Shadow of mordor (max textures) Evil within (max settings) Are just a few examples on high VRAM games, and the witcher 3 will follow suit. If you think you can make it with 4GB on 4K till the end of this gen, you are dreaming boy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdm_freek Posted March 29, 2015 Posted March 29, 2015 (edited) yes i am fully aware which is why i said the following (the gtx 960 sli does fantastic at 4k and only has 2gb of vram but i was just using the 960 sli as an example. 290cf should be plenty for 4k Edited March 29, 2015 by jdm_freek Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarWeeny Posted March 29, 2015 Posted March 29, 2015 yes i am fully aware which is why i said the following (the gtx 960 sli does fantastic at 4k and only has 2gb of vram but i was just using the 960 sli as an example. 290cf should be plenty for 4k The games i mentioned also apply to the 4GB cards @4K... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdm_freek Posted March 29, 2015 Posted March 29, 2015 yes i am fully aware which is why i said the following (the gtx 960 sli does fantastic at 4k and only has 2gb of vram but i was just using the 960 sli as an example. 290cf should be plenty for 4k The games i mentioned also apply to the 4GB cards @4K... i cant find any info on any of those game @ 4k with 290 cf but i do not play any of those besides there will always be those few games that are nvidia biased like war thunder which does not support cf but sli is Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarWeeny Posted March 29, 2015 Posted March 29, 2015 yes i am fully aware which is why i said the following (the gtx 960 sli does fantastic at 4k and only has 2gb of vram but i was just using the 960 sli as an example. 290cf should be plenty for 4k The games i mentioned also apply to the 4GB cards @4K... i cant find any info on any of those game @ 4k with 290 cf but i do not play any of those besides there will always be those few games that are nvidia biased like war thunder which does not support cf but sli is I was more aiming how developers are not doing any decent job at VRAM control, and the requirements are only getting higher. Since those games mentioned are already at 4GB to 6GB on VRAM usage at required specs, one can only imagine what happens after a year or two. Especially if you want to go 4K. I don't even care / didn't even mention about "NVIDIA biased", I guess you want another flame war? Cause that is how they get started...not by me, but by other users. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdm_freek Posted March 29, 2015 Posted March 29, 2015 (edited) yes i am fully aware which is why i said the following (the gtx 960 sli does fantastic at 4k and only has 2gb of vram but i was just using the 960 sli as an example. 290cf should be plenty for 4k The games i mentioned also apply to the 4GB cards @4K... i cant find any info on any of those game @ 4k with 290 cf but i do not play any of those besides there will always be those few games that are nvidia biased like war thunder which does not support cf but sli is I was more aiming how developers are not doing any decent job at VRAM control, and the requirements are only getting higher. Since those games mentioned are already at 4GB to 6GB on VRAM usage at required specs, one can only imagine what happens after a year or two. Especially if you want to go 4K. I don't even care / didn't even mention about "NVIDIA biased", I guess you want another flame war? Cause that is how they get started...not by me, but by other users. i see your point. and my mention of bias was miss worded i only meant there are some game that only support sli i am not a fanboy by any means i would love to go back to nvidia but i need a reason to first whats a flame war ? Edited March 29, 2015 by jdm_freek Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Braegnok Posted March 29, 2015 Posted March 29, 2015 Price/performance wise you would be flabbergasted with crossfire R9-290's and an Acer XG27OHU FreeSync monitor,.. it's not 4K but @ 2560X1440 you would have vary smooth game play for cheep,.. and save your money. http://www.acer.co.uk/ac/en/GB/press/2015/152663 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now