R9 290x benchmarks: AMD R9 290X in 2019: Benchmark vs. RX 590, GTX, RTX, & More | GamersNexus

AMD R9 290X in 2019: Benchmark vs. RX 590, GTX, RTX, & More | GamersNexus

The AMD R9 290X, a 2013 release, was the once-flagship of the 200 series, later superseded by the 390X refresh, (sort of) the Fury X, and eventually the RX-series cards. The R9 290X typically ran with 4GB of memory, although the 390X made 8GB somewhat commonplace, and was a strong performer for early 1440p gaming and high-quality 1080p gaming. The goal posts have moved, of course, as time has mandated that games get more difficult to render, but the 290X is still a strong enough card to warrant a revisit in 2019.

The R9 290X still has some impressive traits today, and those influence results to a point of being clearly visible at certain resolutions. One of the most noteworthy features is its 64 count of ROPs, where the output is converted into a bitmapped image, and its 176 TMUs. The ROPs assist in improving performance scaling as resolution increases, something that also correlates with higher anti-aliasing values (same idea – sampling more times per pixel or drawing more pixels). For this reason, we’ll want to pay careful attention to performance scaling at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K versus some other device, like the RX 580. The RX 580 is a powerful card for its price-point, often managing comparable performance to the 290X while running half the ROPs and 144 TMUs, but the 290X can close the gap (mildly) at higher resolutions. This isn’t particularly useful to know, but is interesting, and illustrates how specific parts of the GPU can change the performance stack under different rendering conditions.

Today, we’re testing with a reference R9 290X that’s been run through both stock and overclocked, giving us a look at the bottom-end performance and average partner model or OC performance. This should cover most the spectrum of R9 290X cards.

Test Methodology

Testing methodology has completely changed from our last GPU reviews, which were probably for the GTX 1070 Ti series cards. Most notably, we have overhauled the host test bench and had updated with new games. Our games selection is a careful one: Time is finite, and having analyzed our previous testing methodologies, we identified shortcomings where we were ultimately wasting time by testing too many games that didn’t provide meaningfully different data from our other tested titles. In order to better optimize our time available and test “smarter” (rather than “more,” which was one of our previous goals), we have selected games based upon the following criteria:

  • Game Engine: Most games run on the same group of popular engines. By choosing one game from each major engine (e.g. Unreal Engine), we can ensure that we are representing a wide sweep of games that just use the built-in engine-level optimizations
  • API: We have chosen a select group of DirectX 11 and DirectX 12 API integrations, as these are the most prevalent at this time. We will include more Vulkan API testing as more games ship with Vulkan
  • Popularity: Is it something people actually play?
  • Longevity: Regardless of popularity, how long can we reasonably expect that a game will go without updates? Updating games can hurt comparative data from past tests, which impacts our ability to cross-compare new data and old, as old data may no longer be comparable post-patch

Game graphics settings are defined in their respective charts.

We are also testing most games at all three popular resolutions – at least, we are for the high-end. This includes 4K, 1440p, and 1080p, which allows us to determine GPU scalability across multiple monitor types. More importantly, this allows us to start pinpointing the reason for performance uplift, rather than just saying there is performance uplift. If we know that performance boosts harder at 4K than 1080p, we might be able to call this indicative of a ROPs advantage, for instance. Understanding why performance behaves the way it does is critical for future expansion of our own knowledge, and thus prepares our content for smarter analysis in the future.

For the test bench proper, we are now using the following components:

GPU Test Bench (Sponsored by Corsair)









 

Component

Courtesy of

CPU

Intel i7-8086K 5.0GHz

GamersNexus

GPU

This is what we’re testing!

Often the company that makes the card, but sometimes us (see article)

Motherboard

ASUS ROG Maximus X Hero

ASUS

RAM

Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB 3200MHz

Corsair

PSU

Corsair AX1600i

Corsair

Cooler

NZXT Kraken X62

NZXT

SSD

Plextor 256-M7VC
Crucial MX300 1TB

GamersNexus

Sniper Elite 4 Benchmark – R9 290X 2019 vs.

RTX 2070, 2060, GTX 970, RX 590

Sniper Elite 4 will start us out. Before displaying results, remember that one of the most interesting areas to look is going to be scaling performance between two fixed goalposts as we change resolutions. If the distance between those goalposts shrinks, that is indicative of an architectural advantage or deficit at the new resolution. We’ll set the RX 580 and R9 290X at stock settings for these posts. Sniper Elite 4 gives us a well-optimized DirectX 12 title to test with, which is valuable because we want higher framerates even at 4K to better illustrate some of those scaling gaps. Keep in mind that the 290X came out long before 4K was popularized. 1080p still had almost all of the marketshare.

At 4K first, we see the R9 290X stock card at 38FPS AVG, with lows surprisingly close by at 32FPS and 30FPS 1% and 0.1% low. We’ll look at frametimes in a moment. Overclocking headroom was limited and capped at about 1060MHz, getting us to 41FPS AVG and climbing 7. 9% over the R9 290X stock card. These performance figures peg the R9 290X and its overclocked counterpart at rough equivalence with the RX 580 8GB card, not too distant from the new RX 590 Fatboy. This is without yet considering power consumption, mind you. The GTX 1060 is just surpassed by our R9 290X results, as is the GTX 970.

For our goal posts, the R9 290X stock GPU allows the RX 580 8GB stock GPU to hold a lead of about 2.9%.

Transitioning to the more limited 1080p results, we see now that the R9 290X has a stock framerate of about 98FPS AVG, allowing the RX 580 8GB card a lead of 9.4% with its 107FPS AVG. The fact that the R9 290X closed the gap at 4K suggests to us that the 580 becomes limited in its ROPs and TMUs, but primarily ROPs. The 290X is better equipped on this front leaving its biggest limitation as frequency, which is why the card has more trouble keeping up at the lower resolutions. Once the RX 580 gets pounded with higher demand on the pixel pipeline, where it becomes more limited, the R9 290X pulls ahead. This same pattern would emerge with anti-aliasing, as it’s effectively increasing the sample rate in the same way as increasing resolution, thus also becoming ROPs-bound rapidly.

As for 1080p performance on the whole, the 290X performs behind a GTX 1060 6GB card and ahead of an RX 570 4GB card.

Frametimes are what we’re most curious about. As a reminder, frametime plots demonstrate the frame-to-frame variance in time to present a new frame. This is a measure of frame-to-frame intervals in milliseconds, so lower is better, versus benchmark progression. The more consistent each point on the line is to the previous, the better the experience. Deviation from the mean in excess of 8-12ms becomes noticeable to most gamers.

The R9 290X does well in this department with Sniper Elite 4. To Sniper’s credit, the game is remarkably well-built, but the 290X still needs the right hardware to keep frame pacing consistent. In this title, we don’t see too much deviation from the mean frametime, with the biggest variance in the form of 3-4ms swings. This is completely acceptable and, as you can see, isn’t too distant from the modern RX 590’s performance. The 590 has fewer peaks on average, but the difference in consistency is unnoticeable overall for most players. The RTX 2060 is also plotted as an example of the most modern architecture, where we’re nearing an ideal frametime plot. The takeaway is that the 290X does well in frametime consistency in this particular title, and that’s despite some early life issues with frametime consistency. Many of these were patched-up with later driver launches, but the rest would likely be more game- or API-dependent.

F1 2018 – R9 290X Benchmark in 2019

F1 2018 is next, giving us a DirectX 11 game that uses the same API as most of the market back when the 290X released. Just for scaling reasons, we’ll look at 4K results, despite this card not really being meant for it in 2019.

At 4K, the R9 290X 4GB card ends up at about 33FPS AVG, ranking it as similar to the GTX 1060 6GB and GTX 970. The RX 580 8GB outperforms the 290X 4GB by 4.6%, landing at 34FPS AVG. We can also learn from the 390X result, which shows a 34FPS AVG. This card is a refresh of the 290X, with a higher frequency and double the memory capacity. In this title, it rapidly becomes clear that memory is not the primary limitation, as performance only increases by a few percentage points. The 290X and 390X are more limited by the GPU than by the memory.

Moving on to 1440p, we see similar resolution scaling as the previous game: The RX 580 stock GPU’s 56.6FPS AVG is 9.1% ahead of the R9 290X’s 51.9FPS AVG, posting a relative gain in performance for the RX 580. Again, we think this is because the R9 290X can leverage its increased ROPs and texture units at higher resolutions or higher anti-aliasing values, closing the gap as resolution increases. That doesn’t mean it’s playable at those higher resolutions, but does illustrate how the GPUs scale.

For 1440p resolution, the 290X is still reasonably playable in this title. Dropping settings from ultra-high to just ‘high’ or similar would make for a consistent 60FPS and beyond. Comparatively, the 290X does about as well as the GTX 970, although the 290X’s lows manage higher results, with the 390X not too distant. The 390X’s extra memory doesn’t get leveraged in a meaningful way for this benchmark. Versus some modern cards, the 290X is outperformed by the GTX 1060 and RX 580 alike.

We don’t see too much improvement for the 290X at 1080p, moving up to 65FPS AVG and with still minimal gains from overclocking. The RX 580 8GB runs at 72FPS AVG, for a lead of 11.6%. To recap this title, we see 11.6% improvement in the RX 580 at 1080p, 9.1% at 1440p, and 4.6% at 4K, showing very clear performance improvements in the higher-frequency, newer cards at lower resolutions.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider — R9 290X Benchmark vs. GTX 980, 970, RTX 2070

Shadow of the Tomb Raider is up next, giving us a DirectX 12 title for another modern look at performance. Dx12 didn’t officially launch until 2015, so the 290X was made well before the new API saw any adoption.

At 4K, the 290X obviously struggles at 24FPS AVG, making it largely unplayable with these settings. The RX 580 doesn’t do much better at 25FPS AVG, with the 590 at 28FPS AVG. Let’s move on to something more reasonable.

At 1440p, the 290X runs at about 42FPS AVG, with the GTX 1060 functionally tied with the 290X. The differences are inside of error margins, so we can’t state if one is better than the other. The RX 580 8GB leads at 45FPS AVG, with the RX 590 at 50FPS AVG and Vega 56 at 62FPS AVG.

1080p positions the R9 290X in playable territory even with these higher settings, at 60FPS AVG for the overclocked version – about where most partner cards would fall – and 58FPS AVG for the stock model. That puts the 290X as comparable to the GTX 1060 6GB and behind the RX 580 8GB.

Far Cry 5 Benchmark – R9 290X Revisit

Far Cry 5 uses geometrically complex meshes and longer view distances, making it one of the more draw call-intensive games we benchmark.

At 4K, Far Cry 5 positions the 290X at 26FPS AVG, right between the GTX 970 and GTX 980 cards, and affording the RX 580 a lead of 8.3% at 28FPS AVG. This isn’t particularly playable under these settings so, once again, we’re mostly using them for perspective.

At 1440p, performance climbs significantly to 43FPS AVG, which is about where the RX 570 and 390X perform. NVIDIA’s GTX 1060 6GB outperforms the 290X by a few percent here, with the most modern cards posting significant leads. The RX 580 holds a 16.7% lead, showing one of the largest gaps we’ve seen between the two yet, but still following the trends we saw previously.

1080p really carries this trend, now allowing the RX 580 8GB card a lead of 22%, which is the biggest gain we’ve seen thus far. As a reminder, that’s against 8.3% at 4K and 16.7% at 1440p, so our earlier theory remains consistent. As for raw framerate, the 290X is still adequate for 60FPS in Far Cry 5 at 1080p and with these settings, but it is getting long in the tooth. Vega 56 and GTX 1070s or even RTX 2060s would offer considerable performance improvements, as you can see in the chart.

GTA V Benchmark – R9 290X Revisit

GTA V is a 2015 game and is the oldest on our benchmark, but is also the most-played game out of everything in this test suite.

At 4K, GTA V lands the R9 290X at 24FPS AVG, which is within error of the RX 580 or slightly leading it, for the first time all bench, and not distant from the GTX 970. This is more of a synthetic look, of course, since it’s not particularly playable.

1440p again posts the R9 290X and RX 580 as roughly equal performance. We run GTA V with 2x MSAA, so it is likely that we’re seeing a potential ROPs limitation on the 580. The 390X does actually post meaningful improvement over the R9 290X here, landing at 53FPS AVG, but this is clearly more of a change in frequency than memory capacity, as the overclocked 290X is not too distant from the 390X.

Conclusion: R9 290X in 2019

It’s really not all that bad, although is considerably aged in its ability to run some of these titles at higher resolutions.

If willing to occasionally drop settings to medium or high, shying away from ultra, and if willing to stick to 1080p, the R9 290X still does reasonably well in these games. Going for better graphics settings might suggest that it’s about time to replace the GPU, though, and in such instances, you’d want to shoot higher than an RX 580, RX 590, or GTX 1060. The R9 290X maintains performance roughly equivalent to these devices – or close enough that the differences aren’t worth a purchase – in modern gaming scenarios, even including DirectX 12. Keeping in mind that Dx12 didn’t even publicly exist when the R9 290X was released, the fact that the 290X maintains overall acceptable performance in Dx12 titles is impressive.

Jumping to Vega-class cards or RTX 2070 would sort of be the entry point for this one, minimally, as anything short of that is a pointless endeavor and more of a “side-grade.” The most interesting take-away, we think, is how the R9 290X managed to close the gap between itself and the RX 580 when playing at increasing resolutions. The natural downside is that the R9 290X isn’t particularly well-equipped for these games at 4K, anyway; while closing the gap is interesting, it doesn’t change the story that these games are functionally unplayable at such high settings and resolutions. The biggest motivator for an upgrade will likely be supporting those higher resolution displays, especially that they’re properly affordable now, unlike when the 290X launched.

The card is getting long in the tooth, but it’s still good a little while longer for anyone truly pinching pennies.

Editorial, Testing: Steve Burke
Video: Andrew Coleman

Radeon R9 290X [in 9 benchmarks]

Summary

AMD started Radeon R9 290X sales 24 October 2013 at a recommended price of $549. This is a desktop graphics card based on a GCN architecture and made with 28 nm manufacturing process. It is primarily aimed at gamer market. 4 GB of GDDR5 memory clocked at 1.25 GHz are supplied, and together with 512 Bit memory interface this creates a bandwidth of 320 GB/s.

Compatibility-wise, this is dual-slot card attached via PCIe 3.0 x16 interface. Its manufacturer default version has a length of 275 mm. 1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin power connector is required, and power consumption is at 250 Watt.

It provides poor gaming and benchmark performance at


18.96%

of a leader’s which is NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090.

GeForce RTX4090

Compare

General info


Some basic facts about Radeon R9 290X: architecture, market segment, release date etc.

Place in performance ranking 240
Value for money 9.99
Architecture GCN (2011−2017)
GPU code name Hawaii XT
Market segment Desktop
Design reference
Release date 24 October 2013 (9 years old)
Launch price (MSRP) $549
Current price $210 (0. 4x MSRP) of 168889 (A100 PCIe 80 GB)

Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Technical specs


Radeon R9 290X’s specs such as number of shaders, GPU base clock, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of Radeon R9 290X’s performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider its benchmark and gaming test results.

Pipelines / CUDA cores 2816 of 20480 (Data Center GPU Max NEXT)
Boost clock speed 947 MHz of 3599 (Radeon RX 7990 XTX)
Number of transistors 6,200 million of 14400 (GeForce GTX 1080 SLI Mobile)
Manufacturing process technology 28 nm of 4 (GeForce RTX 4080)
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt of 2400 (Data Center GPU Max Subsystem)
Texture fill rate 176. 0 of 969.9 (h200 SXM5 96 GB)
Floating-point performance 5,632 gflops of 16384 (Radeon Pro Duo)

Size and compatibility


This section provides details about the physical dimensions of Radeon R9 290X and its compatibility with other computer components. This information is useful when selecting a computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards, it includes details about the interface and bus (for motherboard compatibility) and additional power connectors (for power supply compatibility).

Bus support PCIe 3.0
Interface PCIe 3.0 x16
Length 275 mm
Width 2-slot
Supplementary power connectors 1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin

Memory


Parameters of memory installed on Radeon R9 290X: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Note that GPUs integrated into processors have no dedicated memory and use a shared part of system RAM instead.

Memory type GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB of 128 (Radeon Instinct MI250X)
Memory bus width 512 Bit of 8192 (Radeon Instinct MI250X)
Memory clock speed 1250 MHz of 22400 (GeForce RTX 4080)
Memory bandwidth 320 GB/s of 3276 (Aldebaran)
Shared memory

Video outputs and ports


Types and number of video connectors present on Radeon R9 290X. As a rule, this section is relevant only for desktop reference graphics cards, since for notebook ones the availability of certain video outputs depends on the laptop model, while non-reference desktop models can (though not necessarily will) bear a different set of video ports.

Display Connectors 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Eyefinity +
HDMI +
DisplayPort support +

Technologies


Technological solutions and APIs supported by Radeon R9 290X. You’ll probably need this information if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAcceleration +
CrossFire 1
Enduro
FreeSync 1
HD3D +
LiquidVR 1
PowerTune
TressFX 1
TrueAudio +
ZeroCore
UVD +
DDMA audio +

API support


APIs supported by Radeon R9 290X, sometimes including their particular versions.

DirectX DirectX® 12
Shader Model 6.3
OpenGL 4.6
OpenCL 2.0
Vulkan +
Mantle

Benchmark performance


Synthetic benchmark performance of Radeon R9 290X. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.


R9 290X
18.96

    Passmark

    This is probably the most ubiquitous benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

    Benchmark coverage: 25%


    R9 290X
    7425

    3DMark Vantage Performance

    3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280×1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

    Benchmark coverage: 16%


    R9 290X
    37284

    3DMark 11 Performance GPU

    3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280×720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

    Benchmark coverage: 16%


    R9 290X
    16168

    3DMark Fire Strike Score

    Benchmark coverage: 13%


    R9 290X
    9835

    3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

    Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature seemingly made of lava. Using 1920×1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

    Benchmark coverage: 13%


    R9 290X
    11717

    3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

    Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280×720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

    Benchmark coverage: 13%


    R9 290X
    73987

    3DMark Ice Storm GPU

    Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280×720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

    Benchmark coverage: 8%


    R9 290X
    332042

    Unigine Heaven 3.0

    This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

    Benchmark coverage: 4%


    R9 290X
    140

    Unigine Heaven 4.0

    This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark, a newer version of Unigine 3.0 with relatively small differences. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. The benchmark is still sometimes used, despite its significant age, as it was released back in 2013.

    Benchmark coverage: 1%


    R9 290X
    1547


    Mining hashrates


    Cryptocurrency mining performance of Radeon R9 290X. Usually measured in megahashes per second.






    Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) 623 Mh/s  
    Decred / DCR (Decred) 1.07 Gh/s  
    Ethereum / ETH (DaggerHashimoto) 25. 75 Mh/s  
    Monero / XMR (CryptoNight) 0.76 kh/s  
    Zcash / ZEC (Equihash) 350 Sol/s  

    Gaming performance


    Let’s see how good Radeon R9 290X is for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in frames per second. Comparisons with game system requirements are included, but remember that sometimes official requirements may reflect reality inaccurately.

    Average FPS across all PC games

    Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular modern games across different resolutions:

    Full HD 87
    4K 50

    Performance in popular games

    Relative perfomance


    Radeon R9 290X’s performance compared to nearest competitors among desktop video cards.



    NVIDIA T1000 8 GB
    103.06


    AMD Ellesmere
    102


    AMD Radeon RX 6400
    101.16


    AMD Radeon R9 290X
    100


    AMD Radeon RX 570
    93.83


    AMD Radeon R9 285
    89.93


    NVIDIA T600
    87.61

    NVIDIA equivalent


    According to our data, the closest NVIDIA alternative to Radeon R9 290X is T1000 8 GB, which is faster by 3% and higher by 10 positions in our ranking.

    T1000 8GB

    Compare


    Here are some closest NVIDIA rivals to Radeon R9 290X:


    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
    105.75


    NVIDIA T1000
    103. 38


    NVIDIA T1000 8 GB
    103.06


    AMD Radeon R9 290X
    100


    NVIDIA T600
    87.61


    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti
    84.81


    NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A
    81.49

    Similar GPUs

    Here is our recommendation of several graphics cards that are more or less close in performance to the one reviewed.

    Radeon RX470

    Compare

    Radeon R9Nano

    Compare

    GeForce GTX1050 Ti

    Compare

    Radeon R9380

    Compare

    Radeon RX480

    Compare

    GeForce GTX960

    Compare

    Recommended processors

    These processors are most commonly used with Radeon R9 290X according to our statistics.



    FX
    8350

    3.8%



    Ryzen 5
    2600

    2.2%



    FX
    8320

    2.2%



    FX
    6300

    1.9%



    Ryzen 5
    3600

    1.8%



    Core i7
    3770

    1.8%



    Core i5
    3470

    1.6%



    Xeon E5
    2650 v2

    1.5%



    Core i5
    4460

    1.4%



    Xeon E5
    2689

    1.4%

    User ratings: view and submit


    Here you can see the user rating of the graphics card, as well as rate it yourself.


    Questions and comments


    Here you can ask a question about Radeon R9 290X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.


    Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.

    cover your ears — take off! GECID.com. Page 1

    ::>Video cards
    >2019
    > AMD Radeon R9 290X Gameplay vs. GTX 1060: Cover Your Ears, We’re Taking Off!

    25-12-2019

    Page 1
    Page 2
    One page

    The Radeon R9 290X video card appeared at the end of 2013. It is based on the GPU Hawaii XT, created on the basis of the second generation 28-nm GCN microarchitecture. It has 2816 stream processors, 176 texture units and 64 raster units. The clock frequency is 1000 MHz.

    Paired with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory with an effective speed of 5 GHz and a bandwidth of 320 GB / s with a 512-bit bus. Although later 8-gigabyte versions appeared. But anyway R9The 290X is a really hot and gluttonous graphics card — its TDP reaches almost 300W.

    We will renew our acquaintance using the example of SAPPHIRE Radeon R9 290X , provided by the Megabyte store. He does not have an Internet site, but there is a wide selection of computer components.

    The video card itself has a reference frequency formula and a reference cooling system. The design of the cooler includes a vapor chamber, an aluminum heatsink and a single 76mm turbine-type fan.

    When running the stress test, the cooler runs in balanced mode at about 2200 rpm by default, and the GPU frequency rises to 870 MHz. If you turn the speed up to a maximum of 4700 rpm, then even the Redragon headphones did not save you from noise, and your colleagues fled in horror to the farthest corner of the test lab, clustered together and thought about a revenge plan.

    Out of harm’s way in games, they left the cooler in a balanced mode, and in some projects they actually saw the declared 1000 MHz. True, the GPU temperature reached 94°C — you can put the system unit under the table and turn off the heating.

    But most of all we were surprised not even by the heating figures, but by the comparison with the current competitor in the face of the 6 GB GTX 1060. cooling system. For reference: the debut of the GTX 1066 took place in mid-2016, and its recommended price at the start of sales reached $29.9. And for the R9 290X in 2013, they asked for $549.

    So, in DirectX 11, using the example of Far Cry New Dawn with the maximum graphics preset, the cheaper and colder GTX 1066 deals with the opponent without any problems. The advantage in performance is at least 16%, and we have already thought that we need to take a simpler competitor.

    But for curiosity, we launched Strange Brigade in DirectX 12 mode with an ultra preset and did not believe our eyes — R9The 290X made a comeback in average speed and rare events. Now it is ahead by a maximum of 16%.

    The third round of the battle took place in the Vulkan mode on the example of World War Z with an ultra preset. And again, AMD fans have a reason to rejoice — in terms of average speed, the R9 290X pulled ahead, and in other statistics, the GTX 1066 turned out to be faster. Although in both cases the difference does not exceed 2 FPS.

    The result is a situation familiar from the Rocky movie — on average, the GTX 1066 retains the advantage due to the huge lead in the first benchmark, but the outsider of this comparison proved to be a real fighter and deserved public recognition.

    Now let’s talk about the test stand. To match the video card, they took a far from new and never top-end 8-thread Intel Core i7-7740X processor at face value, with a thermal package of 112 W.

    Its cooling was entrusted to the cooler be quiet! DARK ROCK PRO 4, a massive two-section heatsink and a pair of quiet fans can handle 250-watt chips. Therefore, with this processor, he did not particularly strain.

    The motherboard will be «simple» — ASUS TUF X299 MARK 1 ATX format.

    The RAM subsystem is represented by four conventional DDR4-2400 sticks from Apacer.

    Most of the games and operating system are installed on a pair of Apacer SSDs. For the rest, there’s a hybrid drive from Seagate.

    A true gamer must remember two things — winning the battle and keeping the system powered. Girls, sleep and food are secondary. And if the first does not always work out well, then on the second point we are calm thanks to block Super Flower Leadex III Gold 650W with powerful 12V channel and 7 year warranty.

    We were also frankly lucky with the case. be quiet! Silent Base 801 not only can accommodate any components, but also immediately provides them with the necessary space and good air circulation due to three pre-installed turntables.

    The Redragon brand helped us with peripherals. After two tests, there were more live impressions. The Redragon Indrah mechanical keyboard with a Skeleton-type design pleased with a solid case assembly, which consists of a metal top plate and a plastic bottom one. True, she is quite branded.

    The Redragon Cobra feels like the Razer DeathAdder and HyperX PulseFire FPS. It has nice ergonomics, especially for right-handers with an average palm size. The optimal grip is a claw or palm.

    The Redragon Archelon mousepad was used to quickly move the mouse.

    But the Redragon Lagopasmutus headphones helped to focus on the game without being distracted by extraneous sounds.

    Gameplay recorded by external system with AVerMedia Live Gamer 4K.

    Jokes are jokes, and the gameplay itself will not comment. Launch World of Tanks with ultra settings. Even on a light tank, you can successfully maneuver and punish opponents, if not with your own firepower, then with the support of your allies. The video buffer is enough with a margin, and you are not afraid of any friezes.

    “We are going, we are going, we are going to distant lands!” This is how we can briefly describe our gaming experience in War Thunder at the maximum preset. The appearance of careless opponents only strengthened the positive impressions of the gameplay: on experience, they were able to upset the adversaries. Average speed increased to 95 fps.

    With the medium preset ARK Survival Evolved automatically reduces the rendering scale to about 66%, and the picture turns out to be soapy. We decided to manually raise it to 100%: there will be light friezes in any case, and if they do suffer, then at least for a clear future perspective.

    Radeon R9 290X [in 9 benchmarks]

    Description

    AMD started Radeon R9 290X sales on October 24, 2013 at a suggested price of $549. This is a desktop video card based on GCN architecture and 28 nm manufacturing process, primarily aimed at gamers. It has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory at 1.25 GHz, and coupled with a 512-bit interface, this creates a bandwidth of 320 Gb / s.

    In terms of compatibility, this is a two-slot PCIe 3.0 x16 card. The length of the reference version is 275 mm. An additional 1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin power cable is required for connection, and the power consumption is 250 watts.

    It provides poor performance in tests and games at the level of

    18.96%

    from the leader, which is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090.

    GeForce RTX 4090

    Compare

    General Information

    Information about the type (desktop or laptop) and architecture of the Radeon R9 290X, as well as when sales started and cost at the time.

    90 174 9.99

    90 174 Reference design
    Performance ranking 240
    Value for money
    Architecture GCN (2011-2017)
    GPU 9 0160 Hawaii XT
    Type Desktop
    4
    Release price $549
    Current price 901 $60,210 (0. 4x) of 168889 (A100 PCIe 80 GB)

    Value for money

    Performance to price ratio. The higher the better.

    Features

    Radeon R9 290X’s general performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core clock, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. They indirectly talk about Radeon R9 performance290X, but for an accurate assessment, you need to consider the results of benchmarks and gaming tests.

    Number of stream processors 2816 of 20480 (Data Center GPU Max NEXT)
    Boost frequency 947 MHz out of 3599 (Radeon RX 7990 XTX )
    Number of transistors 6.200 million of 14400 (GeForce GTX 1080 SLI (Mobile))
    Process 28nm of 4 (GeForce RTX 4080)
    Power consumption (TDP) 250 W (h 200 SXM5 96 GB)
    Floating point performance 5. 632 gflops of 16384 (Radeon Pro Duo)

    Compatibility and dimensions 9014 1

    Information on Radeon R9 290X compatibility with other computer components. Useful for example when choosing the configuration of a future computer or to upgrade an existing one. For desktop video cards, these are the interface and connection bus (compatibility with the motherboard), the physical dimensions of the video card (compatibility with the motherboard and case), additional power connectors (compatibility with the power supply).

    Bus PCIe 3.0
    Interface PCIe 3.0 x16
    Length 275mm
    Thickness 2 slots
    Additional power connectors 1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin 90 181

    RAM

    Parameters of the memory installed on Radeon R9 290X — type, size, bus, frequency and bandwidth. For video cards built into the processor that do not have their own memory, a shared part of the RAM is used.

    9017 3

    90 174

    Memory type GDDR5
    Maximum memory 901 60 4 GB of 128 (Radeon Instinct MI250X)
    Memory bus width 512 bits of 8192 (Radeon Instinct MI250X)
    Memory frequency 1250 MHz of 22400 (GeForce RTX 4080)
    Memory bandwidth 320Gb/s of 3276 (Aldebaran)
    Shared memory

    Video outputs

    Types and number of video connectors present on Radeon R9 290X. As a rule, this section is relevant only for desktop reference video cards, since for laptop ones the availability of certain video outputs depends on the laptop model.

    Video connectors 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
    Eyefinity 9 0175

    +
    HDMI +
    DisplayPort support 901 60 +

    Technology

    Technology and APIs supported by Radeon R9 290X are listed here. You will need this information if your video card is required to support specific technologies.

    90 174 PowerTune

    9 0183

    AppAcceleration +
    CrossFire 1 0175

    FreeSync

    HD3D +
    LiquidVR 1
    174 TrueAudio +
    ZeroCore 90 175
    UVD +
    Audio DDMA +

    API 9 support0141

    APIs supported by Radeon R9 290X, including their versions.

    DirectX DirectX® 12
    Shader model OpenGL 4.6
    OpenCL 2.0
    Vulkan +
    4

    Benchmark tests

    These are the results of Radeon R9 290X rendering performance tests in non-gaming benchmarks. The overall score is set from 0 to 100, where 100 corresponds to the fastest video card at the moment.


    Overall benchmark performance

    This is our overall performance rating. We regularly improve our algorithms, but if you find any inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in the comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

    R9 290X
    18.96

      Passmark

      This is a very common benchmark included in the Passmark PerformanceTest package. He gives the card a thorough evaluation, running four separate tests for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11, and 12 (the latter being done at 4K resolution whenever possible), and a few more tests using DirectCompute.

      Benchmark coverage: 25%

      R9 290X
      7425

      3DMark Vantage Performance

      3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark. It loads the graphics card with two scenes, one of a girl running away from some kind of military base located in a sea cave, and the other of a space fleet attacking defenseless planet. Support for 3DMark Vantage was discontinued in April 2017 and it is now recommended to use the Time Spy benchmark instead.

      Benchmark coverage: 16%

      R9 290X
      37284

      3DMark 11 Performance GPU

      3DMark 11 is Futuremark’s legacy DirectX 11 benchmark. He used four tests based on two scenes: one is several submarines exploring a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All tests make extensive use of volumetric lighting and tessellation and, despite being run at 1280×720, are relatively heavy. Support for 3DMark 11 ended in January 2020 and is now being replaced by Time Spy.

      Benchmark coverage: 16%

      R9 290X
      16168

      3DMark Fire Strike Score

      Benchmark coverage: 13%

      R9 290X
      9835

      3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

      Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests showing a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature that appears to be made of lava. Using resolution 1920×1080, Fire Strike shows quite realistic graphics and is quite demanding on hardware.

      Benchmark coverage: 13%

      R9 290X
      11717

      3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

      Cloud Gate is a legacy benchmark that uses DirectX 11 feature level 10, used to test home PCs and low-end laptops. It displays several scenes of some strange teleportation device launching spaceships into the unknown at a fixed resolution of 1280×720. As with the Ice Storm benchmark, it was deprecated in January 2020 and 3DMark Night Raid is now recommended instead.

      Benchmark coverage: 13%

      R9 290X
      73987

      3DMark Ice Storm GPU

      Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of the 3DMark package. Ice Storm has been used to measure the performance of entry-level laptops and Windows-based tablets. It uses DirectX 11 feature level 9 to render a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet at 1280×720 resolution. Support for Ice Storm ended in January 2020, now the developers recommend using Night Raid instead.

      Benchmark coverage: 8%

      R9 290X
      332042

      Unigine Heaven 3.0

      This is an old DirectX 11 based benchmark using the Unigine 3D game engine from the Russian company of the same name. It depicts a medieval fantasy city spread over several floating islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012 and was replaced by Heaven 4. 0 in 2013, which introduced several minor improvements, including a newer version of the Unigine engine.

      Benchmark coverage: 4%

      R9 290X
      140

      Unigine Heaven 4.0

      This is an old DirectX 11 based benchmark, a newer version of Unigine 3.0 with relatively minor differences. It depicts a medieval fantasy city spread over several floating islands. The benchmark is still occasionally used despite its considerable age, and it was released back in 2013.

      Benchmark coverage: 1%

      R9 290X
      1547


      Mining hashrates

      Radeon R9 290X performance in cryptocurrency mining. Usually the result is measured in mhash / s — the number of millions of solutions generated by the video card in one second.

      Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) 623 Mh/s
      Decred / DCR (Decred) 1.07 Gh/s
      Ethereum / ETH (DaggerHashimoto) 25. 75 Mh/s
      Monero / XMR (CryptoNight) 0.76 kh/s
      Zcash / ZEC (Equihash) 350 Sol/s

      Radeon R9 290X in games

      FPS in popular games on Radeon R9290X, as well as compliance with system requirements. Remember that the official requirements of the developers do not always match the data of real tests.

      Average FPS

      Here are the average FPS values ​​for a large selection of popular games at different resolutions:

      Full HD 183

      4K 50

      Popular games

      Relative capacity

      Overall Radeon R9 290X performance compared to its closest competitors in desktop graphics cards.


      NVIDIA T1000 8GB
      103.06

      AMD Ellesmere
      102

      AMD Radeon RX 6400
      101. 16

      AMD Radeon R9 290X
      100

      AMD Radeon RX 570
      93.83

      AMD Radeon R9 285
      89.93

      NVIDIA T600
      87.61

      Competitor from NVIDIA

      The closest competitor of Radeon R9 290X from NVIDIA is T1000 8 GB, which is 3% faster on average and higher by 10 positions in our rating.

      T1000 8 GB

      Compare

      Here are some NVIDIA Radeon R9 290X closest competitors:

      NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
      105.75

      NVIDIA T1000
      103.38

      NVIDIA T1000 8GB
      103.06

      AMD Radeon R9 290X
      100

      NVIDIA T600
      87.61

      NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti
      84.81

      NVIDIA GeForce MX570A
      81. 49

      Other video cards

      Here we recommend several video cards that are more or less similar in performance to the reviewed one.

      Radeon RX 470

      Compare

      Radeon R9 Nano

      Compare

      GeForce GTX 1050 Ti

      Compare

      Radeon R9 380

      Compare

      Radeon RX 480

      Compare

      GeForce GTX 960

      Compare

      Recommended processors

      According to our statistics, these processors are most often used with the Radeon R9 290X.


      FX
      8350

      3.8%


      Ryzen 5
      2600

      2.2%


      FX
      8320

      2.2%


      FX
      6300

      1.9%


      Ryzen 5
      3600

      1.

      2024 © All rights reserved