I have that dude, whats better? I was planing on buying the gtx770 4gb, but is that new r9 290 better? It will be for triple monitors, and my main game is rF2. Enviado desde mi MI 2S mediante Tapatalk
Personally i wouldnt get the r9 290 because of power consumption, heat and noise. Dunno how the gtx770 is for tri monitors.
Perhaps the other ati users can update you on performance with the latest build but from what i've been reading since the beginning of rf2 is that it performs better on nvidia. If that's still true, you should get an nvidia card since you say rf2 is your main game.
Hey ViSo, I know you are concerned about your buying decision through all these post but seriously man nVidia all the way. I had a 5870 1GB with triples and the problem was 1GB frame buffer or vram, I upgraded to a GTX680 2GB and was absolutely gobsmacked by the performance a GTX770 is a slightly better 680 that will probably clock better and 4GB will future proof triple screen. Just buy the 770 already it will outclass the r9 290 here or you can have my 780.
The R9 290X is almost always faster than a 780 and sometimes even ahead of the Titan, the 290 non-X is barely slower than the 290X, the 290 should easily take care of a 770 and be right on the heels, if not equal to, a 780. The 290 non-X at $400, in my eyes, makes the 780, the Titan and the 290X as well, all obsolete in my mind. The card is only 4%-9% slower than the Titan matching 290x, yet it costs only $400. Just wait for the custom cards to come out as reference cards, especially AMD, are so loud, plus the cooling isnt good and you want some good cooling for overclocking. On the other hand, the 780 is/will be getting price reduced to $500 as a response to AMD's $550 R9 290X, and a lot of people have much better results, in specifically RFactor 2, with Nvidia than AMD, so a 780 at $500 is really nice.
It's pretty well known that in general Nvidia cards (specifically the drivers) are better for rF2. As I understand, most of the rF2 devs are using Nvidia cards.
See my system info. I just ran a 20 AI BTCC race at the public Silverstone without skipping a beat. 770.
Speaking from experience of both AMD and Nvidia cards in rF2, I would advise anyone to go Nvidia. Performance is better and the drivers are less hassle.
See my system info. I just ran a 20 AI BTCC race at the public Silverstone without skipping a beat.  Did I miss the release of a new mod Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk
The only thing that drives me mad about NVidia is that in SLI they have frame latency (in order to helps smooth things). People spend so much time and money with operating system settings, buying certain monitors due to low input lag, low pixel response times, high refresh rates, putting up with lower graphics settings in order to gain higher fps for more responsiveness, disabling vsync and putting up with tearing as a consequence, etc etc in order to get the absolute lowest input lag we can get, and then BAM an entire frame of added lag just by going on sli. I am assuming AMD's frame pacing technology does the same, but I actually havent confirmed it, I do know though 100% that nvidia does it. If AMD's frame pacing does it too then atleast with it we have the option to disable it, does anyone know of an option to disable NVidias version? 2 780/780 Tis or 2 R9 290/290Xs would be a treat...Especially at some good used prices
Just changed my 6970 for oc 780 gtx: 4x more fps @ 3 screens, almost all details on (no env reflections) native res instead of reduced, only aa is still the same. Unbelievable! Now I'm able to play in 3d at Silverstone @ 30-40 fps with my amd 8350@4.4ghz.
How do u play at 30-40 fps? I thought going from 60 to 120 fps (even on a 60 hz monitor) was a great improvement to feeling more direct and in control of the car, I can't even imagine 30-40.
It is acceptable for me, on the other tracks I'm getting more than 40. Without 3d there are more than 70. I had nVidias 3d already ten years ago pn a 17" crt amd since then I always wished to have it again,but on three screens. Now I'm able to do it even if I have to reducesome details again. I'm very impressed with the gtx and I am an amd guy I've never ever expected such a difference in performance between my old 6970 and the new one. I hoped to get 100% more, but 400%?
yes but you are on single monitor I will never mount a SLI/CF . but yes, the R9-290 is better than that 770, but idk how that R9-290 will perform on rF2 ...
Yep, just to back this up, I have been playing rFactor 2 on triple screens with a GTX770 4GB with a 30 car grid and multiview on with max settings without any issues other than the occasional slow down for a massive cloud of tyre smoke (which is an issue with 1 monitor, not just 3 and is experienced by what I gather is everyone). The rest of my system is an i7 4770k, 16GB RAM and an SSD.
You are so right with this, while i was trying to keep 60fps stable and you came up with this in a different context, i tought i should try that by simply lowering gfx settings to feel what you are talking about. It is a massive improvement and everything is more accurat. After all options to lower lag, this is the way to go, what makes me thinking about how i could reach this level with triples and cards like the 770/2GB - 280x - 290 ? Is it still possible with all details ? I just don't like the heating, noise and power consumption of the new AMD's. So i really don't now what i should do.