This was posted 9 years 9 months 14 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

AMD ASUS 290X Graphics Card Was $725 Now $629 (+ Shipping/Pick-up) @ PC Case Gear

20
AMD ASUS 290X Graphics Card Was $725 Now $629 (+ Shipping/Pick-up) @ PC Case Gear
Go to Deal
Cashback
L[Deactivated] on 13/07/2014 - 05:30 pccasegear.com (162 clicks)
Last edited 13/07/2014 - 06:42 by 1 other user

Hey guys !

So basically the card was $725 went down to $629! MSY has it for $719 and Centercom is at $699. It supposed to be great VALUE for money!
Not an expert here but this card is supposed to compare to the GTX 780TI which is priced from $799 which are also 3GB and not 4GB like the AMD 290X. There always pros and cons! That in mind you'd be crazy not to go for 290X! ALSO you get 3 FREE GAMES which include THEIF, MURDERED Soul Suspect, Sniper Elite, Tomb Raider and much more the website shows what's available, and if you don't claim those games you can hold off till they have something you like in the future!
For those more tech savy opinions are encouraged!

Computing ASUS Computer Component Video Card

Related Stores

PC Case Gear
PC Case Gear

closed Comments

  • ModaMagic on 13/07/2014 - 05:35
    +4

    CPL is $599 http://staticice.com.au/cgi-bin/search.cgi?q=ASUS+Radeon+R9+… +Pickup Option

  • CarbonTwelve on 13/07/2014 - 05:38

    Feed back encouraged !

    Step 1 would be to mention exactly what card it is in the title.

    • [Deactivated] on 13/07/2014 - 05:41

      Thanks Carbon

  • [Deactivated] on 13/07/2014 - 05:44

    What does everyone think of the price comparisons with Geforce?

    • CarbonTwelve on 13/07/2014 - 06:12
      +2

      Personally I think the 780 Ti is a better card, but the 290X is better value.

      • mp3police on 13/07/2014 - 06:32
        +1

        they perform almost the same different games different results. only reason to go nvidia is because of the physx support that is basically it really.
        but yes amd are alot cheaper

        • CarbonTwelve on 13/07/2014 - 07:10
          +1

          http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/65601-asus-radeon-r9-…

          The only game the 290X was faster was Just Cause 2. I'm sure there are more, but in general I think the 780 Ti is faster.

          As for features, G-sync is another that matters IMO. There aren't many monitors atm that support it, but more are coming.

          Having said that, if I were to buy a card now it'd probably be AMD (the R9 290 though, rather than 290X).

        • ProjectZero on 13/07/2014 - 09:18
          +1

          @CarbonTwelve: from my past research on these two cards, they are comparable because they generally run faster on games that are optimised for them. The 290X has a slight advantage on 4k gaming since it has more memory.

          However, looking at it from a power usage view. The 290x seems to use more power then the 780ti so if you keep the card for a long time i think 780ti may be better in the long run. Also, as someone pointed out the tempa on the 290x is crazy hot unless you get something with an after market cooler.

    • p1 ama on 13/07/2014 - 11:48
      +2

      As with most other components, prices are determined by supply and demand which ensures that prices essentially reach equilibrium over time as manufacturers try to maximise their revenue. It's all basic economics.

      You'd see that in reality, the pattern goes something like this.

      1) The best card is always significantly more expensive than the cards directly below. This is because there is usually a lack of competition up the top which means there is little to drive the price down. Furthermore, if the price of the top card is driven down, sales of other cards may be cannibalised. Thus, the 780 Ti is priced in a world of its own and it's there for those who can afford it. So I'll leave it out of this discussion.

      2) From there on down, you'll see that AMD vs. nVidia cards are fairly priced depending on their performance. The R9 290X is around $600, the 780, which is slightly lower performing is around $540. That's a pretty fair game with me, the 780 is around 10% slower than the R9 290X. So pricing here is correct.

      3) What becomes interesting, however, is that AMD offers "cut" versions of their cards, i.e. the R9 290 and the R9 280. Thus, what happens is that the R9 290 offers significantly better value than either the 780 or the R9 290X.

      4) The R9 280X and the GTX 770 are both reasonably priced. The R9 280X is priced slightly lower, but I would say that the 770 has marginally better performance.

      5) The R9 280 and GTX 760 go head to head as well.

      My final bit of advice is this. Go with what makes you happy, not with what is the best "value for money" in terms of an FPS perspective. At the end of the day, if you're choosing between two high end cards such as the 780 and the R9 290X, you're not even going to notice the difference in performance. On top of that, for most games, these cards are hitting above 60 FPS anyway, which means your monitor (unless you have a 120/144 Hz) will not even be able to display any extra gains.

      I own an R9 290X, I got it for $450 off a friend with an EK Waterblock and a backplate, it's a really good deal. But if I had another chance, I would have probably gone with a 780. nVidia drivers are better than AMD drivers.

      That's the problem with these sorts of comparisons, there's more to GPUs than just the raw FPS it can pump out.

      • Murpha on 13/07/2014 - 13:22

        More like price collusion.

        • p1 ama on 13/07/2014 - 13:43

          No, it's elementary economics.

          If something is overpriced relative to the market, people would not buy it. If something is underpriced, then revenue is not maximised.

          To a certain degree you can argue that the market for graphics cards is not an efficient market, but it's probably efficient enough in practice.

      • [Deactivated] on 13/07/2014 - 16:02

        I think the prices were higher initially was from the Bitcoin Mining or mining in general AMD happened to be alot better, now that the craze is gone, the huge demand against supply has dropped. Now prices are seemingly going back to normal with a chance of more price drops?

  • p1 ama on 13/07/2014 - 09:36
    +4

    This is terrible value. The R9 290 is $429 at PCCG, $200 off for very similar performance.

    • [Deactivated] on 18/07/2014 - 20:22

      Umm.. Gee thanks? Terrible value? Or your numbers are terrible… The cheapest r9 290 at PCCG is $449 its the Gigabyte Radeon R9 290 Windforce 4GB $449.. Also it can be argued that XFX Radeon R9 290X 4GB is better value for another $50.. The point of the post was the premium at a cheap price otherwise i would have posted the XFX Radeon R9 290X 4GB at $499… Anyways atleast next time you say something is "terrible value"
      have the common courtesy to link the community? K thank ( THESE ARE PCCG PRICES COULD BE CHEAPER ELSEWHERE)

      • p1 ama on 21/07/2014 - 21:07

        Doesn't matter, prices probably have changed within the 5 days you took to make your post. Even if the 290 is $449, this is still terrible value. Why would you pay $180 or so more for a card that's not even 10% faster than the R9 290. By the way, you don't have to be so pretentious, $429 and $449 is a difference of $20 and you make it seem like that's night and day. Also, what in the world is "premium at a cheap price", it's still terrible value for money.

        • [Deactivated] on 21/07/2014 - 23:11

          Man your the pretentious one, get over yourself.. Quite frankly you make ozbargain seem like a crappy place to comment let alone post a deal… by the way you dont have to be a jerk.. how about this, refrain from replying to me in general and i wont reply to you. Mr.Knowitall .. You live in a world where your always right and belittle others. Thanks im not posting anything any more, not looking to feed a troll like yourself. AND by the way atleast acknowledge the fact that i said that you can get a high end 290X for $499 and the true figure is $449 that you mentioned only $50 difference that might just then justify the 10% increase in performance.

          "This is terrible value. The R9 290 is $429 at PCCG, $200 off for very similar performance."

          Not only are you pretentious but you like belittling others.
          I'm genuinely hurt by your insensitive comments

          It took me this long to make posts and ask questions from the community because of people like you.

          Ozbargain is there so people do save that mere "$20" otherwise people like you and everyone else wouldn't be on this website ! That $20 dollars can feed a family twice on budget or contribute to petrol and living standards

          P.S how about this try saying good job for trying a first deal post? I'm only trying to feed more bargains into the community.. Well and truly my last post.

        • p1 ama on 22/07/2014 - 00:05
          +1

          @Cloud Axel: So anyone who disagrees with you is a troll? You asked for other people's opinions in your post. I'm giving it to you here, that it's not good value.

          And face it, if this was a good deal, as you say, you would have gotten more + votes, which you haven't.

          You keep referring to the $499 290X. That's with the stock cooler, which is loud, runs hot and is discontinued. That is why it's cheap.

          But look, I gave you my honest opinion, it's not a good deal, nothing against you personally.

          Also, learn the difference between your and you're…

        • [Deactivated] on 22/07/2014 - 00:37

          @paulsterio:
          btw i enjoyed reading the comment you did write, the comment you put time and effort putting together.

          **"As with most other components, prices are determined by supply and demand which ensures that prices essentially reach equilibrium over time as manufacturers try to maximise their revenue. It's all basic economics.

          You'd see that in reality, the pattern goes something like this.

          1) The best card is always significantly more expensive than the cards directly below. This is because there is usually a lack of competition up the top which means there is little to drive the price down. Furthermore, if the price of the top card is driven down, sales of other cards may be cannibalised. Thus, the 780 Ti is priced in a world of its own and it's there for those who can afford it. So I'll leave it out of this discussion.

          2) From there on down, you'll see that AMD vs. nVidia cards are fairly priced depending on their performance. The R9 290X is around $600, the 780, which is slightly lower performing is around $540. That's a pretty fair game with me, the 780 is around 10% slower than the R9 290X. So pricing here is correct.

          3) What becomes interesting, however, is that AMD offers "cut" versions of their cards, i.e. the R9 290 and the R9 280. Thus, what happens is that the R9 290 offers significantly better value than either the 780 or the R9 290X.

          4) The R9 280X and the GTX 770 are both reasonably priced. The R9 280X is priced slightly lower, but I would say that the 770 has marginally better performance.

          5) The R9 280 and GTX 760 go head to head as well.

          My final bit of advice is this. Go with what makes you happy, not with what is the best "value for money" in terms of an FPS perspective. At the end of the day, if you're choosing between two high end cards such as the 780 and the R9 290X, you're not even going to notice the difference in performance. On top of that, for most games, these cards are hitting above 60 FPS anyway, which means your monitor (unless you have a 120/144 Hz) will not even be able to display any extra gains.

          I own an R9 290X, I got it for $450 off a friend with an EK Waterblock and a backplate, it's a really good deal. But if I had another chance, I would have probably gone with a 780. nVidia drivers are better than AMD drivers.

          That's the problem with these sorts of comparisons, there's more to GPUs than just the raw FPS it can pump out."**

          I didn't disagree I thoroughly liked it. Then you turned sour out of the blue..

        • Moderatorneil on 22/07/2014 - 00:58

          Cloud Axel & paulsterio,

          Discussion is fine but please remain respectful and refrain from personal attacks against each other. If you would like to further discuss this, do so in the Talk with a Moderator forum and not in this deal/thread.

  • [Deactivated] on 13/07/2014 - 10:25

    yeah

  • mrfluffy on 13/07/2014 - 15:08

    Hmmm

  • [Deactivated] on 13/07/2014 - 16:06
    +2

    Thanks for everyones feedback! I am definitely feeling theres a lot of perspectives and ideas through peoples opinions but at the end the price comparison I figured the $200 price difference from the GTX 780TI would be that fine line of a great bargain. I am definitely learning, keep it up guys. I can see people agreeing/disagreeing and reasons why they agree and disagree :) !
    P.S
    ALSO with upcoming games that are going to run on Mantle technology do you guys think it will make it that much better value? (Almost future proofing the graphics card?)

    Released
    Battlefield 4
    Thief
    Plants vs. Zombies: Garden Warfare
    Sniper Elite 3 (Mantle not yet available)

    Unreleased (Confirmed Mantle support)
    Sid Meier’s Civilization: Beyond Earth
    Star Citizen
    Dragon Age: Inquisition
    Battlefield: Hardline
    Offworld Trading Company
    Mass Effect (untitled)
    Mirror’s Edge (untitled)
    Star Control
    Star Wars: Battlefront
    Rise of the Tomb Raider
    Sims 4
    Dying Light

    Unreleased (Mantle support pending)

    Homefront: The Revolution
    Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare
    Alien: Isolation
    Elite: Dangerous
    Grand Theft Auto V
    Lara Croft and the Temple of Osiris
    Kingdom Come: Deliverance
    Lichdom: Battlemage
    Sleeping Dogs: Triad Wars

    • CarbonTwelve on 14/07/2014 - 11:50

      Personally I doubt Mantle will make that much difference, and even it's capable of providing some boost I think it'll be a while before games implement and take advantage of it (it's a bit like optimising a console generation - takes a lot of time to squeeze the best out of something), by which time nVidia will likely implement it too (if deemed worthwhile).

      Also, IMO, it's never a good idea to "future proof" when you have no idea of whether there'll be any actual benefit in the future.

      • bentan77 on 14/07/2014 - 18:17

        IMO Mantle is just bad, any kind of proprietary software/technology is "bad". Also Nvidia has done a similar thing but from the sound of it it's done at driver level and doesn't require actual game support:

        Performance – Introduces key DirectX optimizations which result in reduced game-loading times and significant performance increases across a wide variety of games compared with the previous 335.23 WHQL. Significant CPU overhead reductions in the driver result in performance gains that will often favor CPU-bottlenecked situations. Per usual, results will vary depending on your GPU, system configuration, and game settings.

        • CarbonTwelve on 15/07/2014 - 03:42
          +1

          Also Nvidia has done a similar thing

          Umm, no, they're just doing driver optimisations, which isn't similar to a different API at all.

        • bentan77 on 15/07/2014 - 22:14

          @CarbonTwelve: It shouldn't really matter how it's done, just whether it actually works or not for the end user.

        • CarbonTwelve on 16/07/2014 - 14:21
          +1

          @bentan77: When you're discussing whether a different API will change things, yes it does matter. AMD could make driver optimisations just like nVidia, which would still tell you nothing about whether Mantle will make a difference.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join