# R9 280x vs. GTX 970. is the performance gap this huge?



## huzzug

The 970 compares well with the 780 / 780ti, which when released were equally faster than the 7970 / 280x, so i do not think that it is some unusual difference. All's good there


----------



## KaffieneKing

This doesn't surprise me at all...

The 280x is based on significantly older tech
The 970 costs a lot more (£180 for a 280x and £260)
Although I would have expected them both to perform a lot better in this test.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *huzzug*
> 
> The 970 compares well with the 780 / 780ti, which when released were equally faster than the 7970 / 280x, so i do not think that it is some unusual difference. All's good there




with this graph it's about 27% faster than an r9 280x at 1080p and afaik maxwell doesn't scale that well with overclocking AND heaven isn't one of its strong benchmarks. I do think the overclock I have with this 280x is no slouch.

was expecting a bit more with the 280x tbh. i'm a bit dissapointed tbh but I bought this from a friend for about 150USD so I guess it's fine

would really appreciate is if someone would post a heaven run with their 280x. maybe there's a software issue or just the omega drivers acting up


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KaffieneKing*
> 
> This doesn't surprise me at all...
> 
> The 280x is based on significantly older tech
> The 970 costs a lot more (£180 for a 280x and £260)
> Although I would have expected them both to perform a lot better in this test.


that's why I thought it would be closer. I had a gtx 780 before and it beats the 970 (both overclocked to the max) the 970 overall had a slight edge with "real" games but it's a bit weak with this benchmark


----------



## Kuivamaa

Just bench them in the same rig to remove the rest of variables first. Afaik CPU still plays a small but measurable part in heaven.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kuivamaa*
> 
> Just bench them in the same rig to remove the rest of variables first. Afaik CPU still plays a small but measurable part in heaven.


I wouldn't want to mess up the drivers with my main rig so that is out of the question. I'm thinking of upgrading my htpc it with a quad core (like an i5 2400/2500) I'll try a second run and see if it does make a big difference

tbh I doubt the i3 is making a difference. I had an OSD at the background and the gpu load was 99% all the time.

+reps btw ty


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kuivamaa*
> 
> Just bench them in the same rig to remove the rest of variables first. Afaik CPU still plays a small but measurable part in heaven.


a bottleneck is noticeabke on unigine so the comparison should be done with similar cpu


----------



## jprovido

~ jprovido :3
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> a bottleneck is noticeabke on unigine so the comparison should be done with similar cpu


I upgraded my i3 2120 to an i5 3470 + h77 chipset.



not much of a difference in unigine heaven (within margin of error imo) but other games greatly improved. far cry 4 was 30-40fps with the i3 2120. now it's 60fps with the occasional stutter


----------



## Tobiman

Unigine is known to be tesslation heavy and is really only for benching Nvidia GPUs. That's why 780Ti hit 90 fps range while the 290X is mostly in the 70s. 3D mark is more appropriate for comparing AMD with Nvidia GPUs.

P.S. The cpu might have something to do with it but i'm not 100% sure about that.


----------



## Farih

Thats a normal score for a 280x.
Dont forget Heaven favors Nvidia alot.
Try 3D mark 11 and the difference will be less (gtx970 will still be ahead though)
3D mark 11 seems to favor AMD.

Firestrike seems to be equal for both.

Also 1145mhz isnt a really great OC, my 280x is 1150mhz out of the box.


----------



## jprovido

I figured heaven would be the fairest comparison because it isn't cpu dependent. I didn't know it's more optimized for nvidia. I'll try 3dmark11 and firestrike
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Farih*
> 
> Thats a normal score for a 280x.
> Dont forget Heaven favors Nvidia alot.
> Try 3D mark 11 and the difference will be less (gtx970 will still be ahead though)
> 3D mark 11 seems to favor AMD.
> 
> Firestrike seems to be equal for both.
> 
> Also 1145mhz isnt a really great OC, my 280x is 1150mhz out of the box.


I thought 1145 was a decent overclock. a friend of mine bought an r9 280x mid last year. I remember overclocking it and I could barely touch 1100mhz (it's a sapphire dual-x card) can't complain though I got this for 150+USD yesterday. dunno how different the pricing is compared to other regions but from where I'm from. it's a really great deal for a 280x


----------



## Blameless

In Heaven with ultra tessellation, yes, the performance gap is that huge.

Not everything will show the same gap, however. Still, the 970 is a noticeably faster card.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I didn't know it's more optimized for nvidia.


In general, anything with absurd levels of tessellation is going to favor NVIDIA, because NVIDIA has superior geometry performance.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I thought 1145 was a decent overclock.


It is, if it's reasonably stable.


----------



## linuxfueled

The difference is notable on everything I run. Not that the 280x cant run every game just fine. However my rig with the GTX970 has better colors and smoother play.

Both systems have identical monitors and components.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> .
> It is, if it's reasonably stable.


I usually give my gpu overclocks "breathing room" to make sure it's 100% stable. my gtx 970 and r9 280x can overclock 15-20mhz more without crashing and artifacts. I make sure it's 100% stable with every game I play.

+reps btw.


----------



## tsm106

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kuivamaa*
> 
> Just bench them in the same rig to remove the rest of variables first. Afaik CPU still plays a small but measurable part in heaven.


http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/2720459/fs/2852526

This equates to 17% faster gscore. The 7970/280x is at around 1380/1880.

Now compare that to my 290x at around 1320/1700. Interesting, the 290x has the same lead roughly 17% over the 970.

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/2889373/fs/2852526

The gap in gscore from my 7970 to 290x is 37%.


----------

