[GPU] PNY GeForce GTX 970 4GB Rev 2 - $279.99 ($329.99 - $40 Rebate) + Free game: Rise of the Tomb Raider w/ purchase
newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E1681...
newegg.comPosted Feb 12, 2016, 10:41 AM UTC
5251
newegg.comShould be $10 instant included in there. Sorry.
5
How dare you.
11
How much better is the 970 over the 960?
3
If you were to buy this specific GPU right now the price /performance would be much better than buying a 960 4gb at $230 average or a 2gb version at $200. It will play most games 60fps at 1080p and is a great card for that resolution. Though arguable since it's been debated on reddit constantly. It's worth the upgrade imo.
11
$50 more than a 960 4gb after rebate gets you this 970. Seems like a no brainer to me?
1
What if the 960 4GB is around $180? I feel like I see those deals around here sometimes.
1
its pretty good at 1440p too and can handle its own in 4k.
-5
At 4k I wouldn't recommend an SLI setup with this GPU.
11
No neither would i but saying it doesnt run 4k at all more or less, isnt true.
1
It can't do 4K. It's not powerful enough to run a decent frame rate, and I'm pretty sure it would run of VRAM first with the textures. Literally all you'd be able to play is LoL or CS, and those don't really look that much better in 4K
4†
Neither of those statements are true, I know quite a few people who run a lot of games at 4k with a GTX 970 and they don't really have any complaints. You can run most games and you don't run out of VRAM without going above what the card can handle, many tests prove that.
2†
You just have to knock settings down... I currently play in 1440p in games instead.
1
[deleted]
1
What is the difference between PNY GTX and an ECGA GTX?
1
Overclocking and cooler would be the first 2 that come to mind. A different cooler doesn't equate a lesser inadequate cooling solution, keep in mind, just different. Also if you register a EVGA card on there website you can upgrade 90 days after purchase.
1
So which would you say is "better?" I'm building a pretty simple 1-1.5k build. Running i7 6700k, barely more cooling than stock on the case
2
If you have the money by all means get EVGA. You'll be paying a premium because you're not only buying a card you're buying the name.
1
You're also buying a great warranty/great customer service.
If you decide to sell the EVGA card, the warranty is transferrable, which makes it an easier sell.
3
Damn I just bought an MSI 970 for like $330 and it's supposed to be here today.
1
I know how you feel. I was going to buy a AIO Powercolor 390x but jet.com removed it from there website for a day. On an impulse buy I went with Sapphire.
For what it's worth MSI has a low RMA rate. https://www.msi.com/news/detail/6ppvofHKQ6SYijfkLB4iiGIeiESST5EiO0EM2UG35LHCB5iBbwdJtRu8iBWWStVjyAwmoWV1wRcK1Z0OuzEL1Q~~
1
i just got my asus strix 970 and one of the fans clicks like no other when it is on. I didn't see anything obstructing it (e.g., wires, etc) so I'm returning it. I don't want to deal with the Asus RMA process. Might pick up an MSI given your link.
2
That's good I always hear EVGA is awesome but I bought a card from them years ago that failed like a month in and that's always stuck with me. Here's to hoping we both enjoy our new cards.
1
Anyone know what the warranty is on this bad boy?
1
I had R9 380 and GTX 960. I would say GTX 960 is better for me in terms of minimum FPS. My R9 380 drops FPS randomly but the 'burst' FPS is high. I ended up selling my R9 380 and kept the 960.
Minimum FPS is more important to me. I would assume this 970 would be better than R9 390 in terms of min. FPS as well.
0
** GPU [GPU] PNY GeForce GTX 970 3.5GB Rev 2 - $279.99 ($329.99 - $40 Rebate) + Free game: Rise of the Tomb Raider w/ purchase
-7
970 or 390?
I would go with the 390. Cheaper, same if not better performance, and double the vram (useful at high resolutions and future proof). That said, the 390 does use more power and generate more heat but that shouldn't be a problem for most.
Double of 3.5 is 7...
This guy speaks the truth though, there is only 3.5gb usable vram in the gtx 970. edit: So I'm getting down voted for letting people know the facts???
There is 4.0 on the card, its is just partitioned crapilly, 3.5 is in one, and at 1080p thatll be pretty much all you need (for most games, some newer ones may obviously push it), but then if it tries to access that last .5, thats where you see performance drops, so technically yes there is 4.0 but its just not really the best
I went with the 970 mostly because of the lower temp/power usage and it comes with rise of the tomb raider which I was wanting to pick up anyway.
The MSI 390 and a 970 both are almost identical in temps. The 390 only being 3c hotter under load.
No arguing about the power usage, it does sip an average of 50w more under load. I'd still pick the 390 though, as future games are going to get Vram hungry and I really don't want to be worried about passing it's 3.5gb cap.
Also, Asynchronous shaders
I agree but I really don't want the extra power usage, I know they said the next line was going to be better with it but I didn't feel like waiting around for that. I have nothing against getting AMD just between that and getting a game I wanted free the 970 had more pros.
I got my girlfriend a 970 from evga. After the 3.5gb bs, I returned it and got her an MSI 390 (that's how I know the temps of each card). I paid for a 4gb card, not a 3.5gb card. The extra power usage (only seen under heavy load, not idle power consumption) only added a couple of cents to the power bill. What other pros are you having?
I posted this before about whether VRAM matters:
This is exactly why I bought it. Everything I read or watch shows that the VRAM difference doesn't mean all that much despite how much Reddit likes to push that it's the end all be all. I bought the 970 because I've had nvidia for a long time and like the performance, power usage and their software/drivers let alone it came bundled with a free game that I would've bought anyways.
Not sure why every 390 owner on Reddit feels the need to push so hard for everyone else to buy it. Someone asked which one to get I put my 2 cents in and now I'm being down voted and questioned on why I bought it.
I don't really know a lot about this stuff, but what about the whole DX12 dilemma? From what I've read, that's going to create some problems down the line for certain NVIDIA cards.
To be honest, sounds like speculation. It's hard to tell which cards will do well with new software. It's like how there was great hype about the Fury X which turned out to be underwhelming.
I guess what I'd read is that in the early tests from some of the current utilizations of DX12, NVIDIA actually lost some FPS, although this was back in August.
It's likely, though, that NVIDIA will figure out an optimization driver or something before DX12 starts being used more frequently.
Also factor in what resolution you're going to game in. For discussion purposes, let's just consider 1440p vs 1080p.
For 1440p, the R9 390 tends to pull ahead. The 8 GB vram will also tend to help here as well (depends on the game, of course).
For 1080p, the 970 takes the lead on average instead.
For me, I'm gaming on a 1080p/144hz panel, so the 970 is a perfect match. I make no plans to upgrade to 1440p until 144hz panels become more affordable (~$300 is the norm).
Hope this helps!
They're neck-and-neck. The best advise I've ever seen someone give is go with whatever one is cheaper (if you're 1080p gaming). If you're gaming above 1080p get the 390 if it's around the same price point.
Though choice The R9 390 performs better and it's a bit cheaper.
The 970 performs slightly worse and includes Rise of the Tomb raider also, it's a bit less power hungry and cooler.
Have in mind the DX12 capabilities, (asynchronous shaders) which make the 390 hotter but Nvidia cards lack it