Topic: Help, WHICH BETTER : GEFORCE GTX 970-4G vs Radeon R9 390X-8G?

[lonsuabo]

Look in the benchmark list for graphic card (http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html)
They only list down "Radeon 290x/390x" in the same section (2 versions but in the same rate), and only 4G. So, the mark of Radeon 290x/390x 4G is lower than GTX 970 4g
But in fact, Radeon 390X has 8G memory, so I wonder how it is compare to GTX 970 4G?
Anyone has uesed Radeon 390X for Lumion rendering, can you share with me your opinions when you are using it infact? And I also want to hear you guys who use GTX 970.
I decide to buy Radeon 390x 8G, but has a bit confused between it and GTX 970.
Please help me, thanks you guys.

[peterm]

Hi lonsuabo

There's lots of reviews on the Radeon 290x/390x.  Some of those reviews indicate that the Radeon does not come close to the GTX:

1.  Toms Hardware.
2. R9 390X/R9 390 vs GTX 970.

In a quick read it seems the hardware is an older chip rebranded.
There's no doubt other reviews that come to a different conclusion.

You can also get a comparison by using GPUBoss Compare.


That makes it all a bit confusing, but as card comparison always have differing features and performance and reviews that the nature of things.

What matters is:
1. Your budget.  Given this is likely to be a business investment and have a life of more than one year with expected returns from projects then is this level of card going to be suitable, ie have you considered the next performance level such as the GTX 980 (and similar Radeon)?

2. The Radeon 390X has 8GB, but that only matters if the type of scenes you want to work with in Lumion will require more complexity and more extensive texturing demands above 4GB. (Note: due to a current Windows issue with DirectX9 for Lumion you should look at using Windows 7 (64bit) when needing to access more than 4GB VRAM.

3. The Passmark is roughly 1500 less for the Radeon than the GTX 970.  That translates in to faster onscreen FPS whilst building scenes and faster render times.  Faster onscreen FPS will only make a difference if the scenes are getting complex.


Here's some further links of ours (if not seen):
1. Hardware for Lumion.
2. LUMION 5: Minimum hardware requirements.
3. Lumion Web Site: Specifications.

[ferret6]

There's no doubt other reviews that come to a different conclusion.

Hi Peter,

I'm just in the market at the very same price point as lonsuabo, and I'd say from my reading the R9 390 8GB, and GTX 970 seem to perform pretty similarly:

http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/86927-sapphire-r9-390-nitro/

As you say, test results will vary. I'm specifically looking at the R9 390 non-X. Which goes to show how absurd naming systems are these days.

Nevertheless, I have a couple of questions before I go ahead and build the rendering machine (which will be the first for my client specifically aimed at Lumion work - he's a full Pro license holder and is using an underpowered machine at present):

1. Do you specifically target Nvidia cards, or program for CUDA, or otherwise favour the Nvidia hardware?
2. The GTX 970 has a split frame buffer, with 3.5GB primary running at 192GB/sec, and .5GB operating at 28GB/sec. Lumion has been seen to be memory intensive, so have you any real-life performance numbers with this card?

I realise that with the AMD solution there are power draw and temperature issues to handle, which is upsetting. But my gut feeling is that my client will fill that 3.5GB, and the extra framebuffer is worth the hassle. But - and it's a big but - I'll go Nvidia if your development team have been targeting their hardware specifically.

Many thanks,

F6.

[peterm]

Hi ferret6

The Passmark scores (which we 'generally' go by) show a slightly different final result.  Passmark for the GTX 970 is 8648 and Radeon R9 290/390 at 6710.  So that's nearly 2000 difference which is quite significant.

I see the difference between 290 and 390 is the extra 4GB for the 390, so the Passmark results could be expected to be same between models.

Without reading the whole article, the Overclocking charts indicate that the R9 (Sapphire) is slightly better, or each is very close (as in their Summary).  But correct me if wrong, that's overclocked, whereas all the others are not stated with any OC tag, so is the comparison fair?

It's hard to know which is a better choice.   

Lumion is not targeted to NVIDIA hardware.  The developers attempt to code things to standards, in the past AMD cards did a few things differently and the performance (at least for Lumion) was noted as less by a bit than "comparable" NVIDIA cards.  It seems that the majority of our users, at least from Benchmark submissions, are opting for NVIDIA cards.

Key thing goes back to what the client expects to use Lumion for in terms of scene requirements; refer LUMION 5: Minimum hardware requirements.  8GB will be useful for more complex scenes, but the 'better' performance of the GTX 970 means render times will be better, so the client will save (some) time (and ultimately cost).

Bit of a balancing act between those and affordability.  Sorry can't be more clear cut. 

Some advice that is current whilst the developers work on things, is that if the scenes are likely to require more than 4GB of VRAM, we do recommend purchasing Windows 7 64bit Pro (which has free upgrade to Windows 10 for a time through to next year).  This allows GPU data to be handed off to the system RAM when needed.

Whatever card is chosen, please also make sure a suitable PSU is used.

Attached is the Benchmark results submitted from our commercial users.

---------------------
DISCLAIMER: Please note that the above does not mean that I or Act-3D endorse specific products. We are unable to offer any guarantees regarding the expected performance in Lumion with the above-mentioned hardware, and you cannot hold us liable for any costs or damages incurred if you purchase hardware based on our posts on this forum or via email.