GTX 980 SLI vs R9 290X 8GB CF, 4K gaming Benchmark results

The guys at TweakTown  have done something we all could dream about, and that is they managed to run a 3 way benchmark of the GTX 980 SLI – R9 290X 8GB CF – R9 295X2 but there is one condition and that is that the benchmark was conducted using an AMD CPU. The AMD FX-9590 that is somewhat under used by PC gamers was put to the test, lets analyses the results.

First of all the test computer that was used consisted of the following specs:

CPU: AMD FX-9590 8-core processor w/Corsair H110 cooler (stock clocks)

Motherboard: ASUS Crosshair V Formula-Z

RAM: 16GB Corsair Vengeance 2400MHz DDR3

Storage: 240GB SanDisk Extreme II and 480GB SanDisk Extreme II

Chassis: In Win X-Frame

PSU: Corsair AX1200i digital PSU

Software: Windows 7 Ultimate x64

Drivers: Catalyst 14.12 / GeForce 347.25

 

For this test, here are the settings used:

Here’s how we’ve got our in-game settings:

3DMark: 8K with AA disabled

Unigine Heaven: 4K w/4x AA

Metro: Last Light: 4K w/SSAA enabled

Sniper Elite 3: 4K with 4x supersampling

Tomb Raider: 4K w/4x SSAA enabled

Shadow of Mordor: 4K w/200% supersampling (8K)

Battlefield 4: 4K w/200% supersampling (8K)

The battle for supremacy between AMD and Nvidia are put to the test, will the crossfire configuration beat Nvidia’s SLI ?

 

Synthetic Benchmarks

3DMark Fire Strike….

Here we can see the Sapphire Radeaon R9 290X 8GB CF jump on top via crossfire.

GTX 980 SLI vs R9 290X 8GB CF vs R9 295X2 3

Here are the results from Heaven at 4K.

The R9 290X 8GB CF in crossfire is faster than vs R9 295X2 in Battlefield 4. Interesting that the Nvidia GTX 980 in SLI is the slowest.

GTX 980 SLI vs R9 290X 8GB CF vs R9 295X2 5

Game Benchmarks

GTX 980 SLI vs R9 290X 8GB CF vs R9 295X2 in Battlefield 4. A crossfire configuration and an Nvidia SLI configuration are equally similar in Battlefield 4.  But the GTX 980 SLI has faster minimum frames per second.

GTX 980 SLI vs R9 290X 8GB CF vs R9 295X2 7

GTX 980 SLI vs R9 290X 8GB CF vs R9 295X2 in Metro: Last Light. There is no doubt that the AMD R9 290X 8GB is always proven faster in Metro games.

GTX 980 SLI vs R9 290X 8GB CF vs R9 295X2 9

GTX 980 SLI vs R9 290X 8GB CF vs R9 295X2 in Shadow of Mordor. The most embarrassing defeat from Nvidia comes from this game where the R9 290X 8GB jumps way on top, with the GTX 980 in SLI mustering only 4 frames per second in Shadow of Mordor.

GTX 980 SLI vs R9 290X 8GB CF vs R9 295X2 11

GTX 980 SLI vs R9 290X 8GB CF vs R9 295X2 in Tomb Raider

GTX 980 SLI vs R9 290X 8GB CF vs R9 295X2 15

Up until just recently, 4GB of VRAM on the latest video cards has been the best you can get. It was only recently that the consumer side of things started to see cards with 6GB and 8GB of VRAM, with NVIDIA offering the GTX Titan range of cards with 6GB of VRAM, while AMD offer 8GB of cards with their Radeon R9 290X.

At 4K, you don’t need 8GB of VRAM, it’s as simple as that. But when you start moving above that and using 8K, or 7680×4320, you really need much more than 4GB of VRAM. 6GB of VRAM would be good, but 8GB of VRAM or more is ideal. During our testing, Battlefield 4 was using around 5.6GB of VRAM, while Shadow of Mordor was pushing 7.9GB of VRAM – filling the entire 8GB of VRAM.

 

[via]

Share this post