GPU Buying Guide - (Read first post)

Thomas Diaz53, first things first: tell me exactly which power supply you're running.

Another thing—those GPUs you're looking at are going to be heavily bottlenecked by your CPU in modern titles (though maybe not if you're just playing FIFA or Madden).

User123

Grab an R9 290 for $833 while they're still out there.

Gary Anderson38

Those rebrands aren't even flagship models. We've got the R9 Fury and Fury x dropping any day now, followed by the Fury Nano and the dual Fury.

Right now I'm running some 400W unit, but it’s ten years old and making a weird rattling noise...

Thomas Diaz53 said:right now I've got some old 400W unit, but it's ten years old and making weird noises..

basically you need a new GPU and a new PSU too, unless your goal is just to fry your whole PC😁

That’s exactly why I’m asking:

If I decide to go with this ASUS r7265, looking at the specs—the Power Consumption says "up to 150W" and mentions needing an additional 6-pin PCIe connector...

What kind of PSU should I actually be looking at? Keep in mind my Q9300 CPU pulls about 95W.

Would this unit work, and is it compatible with my setup (P43, Q9300..)?

Thermaltake Smart SE 530W

That would probably do the job, but I guess there are better options out there than that TT model. If you were shopping, which store would you even hit up?

Amazon or Best Buy?

Timothy Kim60 said:Bryan Evans77

Yeah, looks like it’s got the Tahiti dual fan. Link?If it is... $233 Just take it. A dual fan setup is perfectly fine. Honestly, that GTX 660 is weaker anyway, and its cooler isn't exactly top-tier—it’s just some single vent Gainward model.

Yeah, that's exactly what I was looking at too. Is that why you were bringing up the single fan? 👍
Probably gonna be that...
Maybe I'll run a few tests if the mood strikes me... 😁

Timothy Kim60 said:Gary Anderson38

Those rebrands aren't even flagships. We've got the R9 Fury and Fury x coming out soon, then later the Fury Nano and the dual Fury.

Oh, wow. That sounds just wonderful. 😁 How much are those "flagship" models actually going to set me back?

I'm looking at this overpriced 390 (non-X version) and they want $1333, meanwhile the 290X—which is faster anyway—is sitting under $1000.

Fury my ass, who's actually buying this stuff?

The bottom line is they haven't built anything new for the mainstream market; they're just repackaging garbage and charging a premium for it.

The R9 390 is $967(just a bit faster than the GTX 970 with 8GB VRAM), while the R9 390X is $1300. I guess prices might dip a little lower in a month or so, just like they usually do.

They’re actually identical. It turns out the performance gap comes down to different clock speeds and the fact that current drivers only support the 3xx series—which explains why you're seeing about 40% better tessellation in The Witcher 3.

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/AMD-Ra...lerie/2391911/

An R9 290 for $25? That’s an absolute steal.$867 Is Best Buy for real? Paying extra for these 290x, 390, and 390X models feels like absolute madness.

I’m on board regarding the 390X, though I think the standard 390 could be a pretty solid deal if we see a $900(-10%) price drop. It draws a bit less power, and with a 5-15% bump in speed (maybe a 50MHz increase on the GPU clock and 1GHz on the memory), you get that extra 8GB of VRAM over the R9 290.

We’ll need to wait for the dust to settle before we can judge the actual price point, but if you ask me, bumping it up to 8GB was a total waste. It just drives the MSRP through the roof. They should have stuck with 4GB and used those savings to undercut the competition instead. Back when the R9 290 and R9 390 first dropped, they would have been an absolute steal at $733, especially considering they were sitting around $767 for a while
.

crimsonstag84 said:I'm with you on the 390X, but the 390 could be a solid deal if it drops by $900(-10%). It pulls less power and runs about 5-15% faster (with a 50MHz boost to the GPU clock and 1GHz on the memory) than the R9 290, plus you get that 8GB VRAM.

And "lower power consumption" is a stretch... the MSI R9 390 x pulls nearly 300W, which is way higher than the R9 290. 🤷

According to the Guru3d review, the MSI R9 390 x pulls less power than the R9 290 x, whereas Hardcore and Tom's Hardware both report that it consumes significantly more energy 🤷

Timothy Kim60 said:One Guru3d review claims the MSI card pulls less power than the R9 290 x, but Hardcore or Tom's Hardware say it’s actually pulling way more 🤷

It just comes down to how they're measuring the wattage...

Whatever. As long as prices drop by $167 over the next three months to hit their actual value, we can finally go shopping 😬

Aha... so I guess if you pick a mid-range model, it’ll probably perform similarly to the R9 290 x.

My next big jump will likely be to the 14nm Gen2 stuff, maybe sometime in 2018.😛

crimsonstag84 said:Right... so if you pick something mid-range, it's basically the same as an R9 290 x.

My next big jump will probably be to some 14nm Gen2 tech around 2018. 😛

Man, my 7850 isn't going to make it to 2018... it's already starting to struggle.🕺

I'm done with AMD, unless they drop the price on the R9 290 x below $833

I'm just holding out for Pascal

Why bother upgrading to an R9 290 x when you could just stick with the standard 290 you already own for $25? There is virtually zero difference in performance between these two GPUs; the R9 290 x simply isn't worth the extra cash.