Sapphire Vapor-X R9 290 Tri-X OC Video Card Review
Sapphire Vapor-X R9 290 Overclock Edition
The Radeon R9 290 GPU came out in November 2013, making it almost 6 months old, and while it isn’t the top of the line model it still has some impressive specifications. Powered by a single 28nm AMD Hawaii GPU, it features 2560 Stream processors running at 947MHz, and 4GB of GDDR5 memory clocked at 5000MHz. Sapphire has taken those specifications and boosted them a little with their Overclocked edition. The Stream processors are running at 1030MHz, and the 4GB GDDR5 memory has been clocked to 5600MHz. Sapphire doesn’t stop there, they have also added their Tri-X Cooling which features three fans rather than the standard two fans, and their Vapor-X technology to their Vapor-X R9 290 Overclocked which is currently available as part number 11227-04-40G for $499.99 shipped; a 2 year warranty is included at that price.
The front of the Sapphire Vapor-X R9 290 has three 90mm fans on the front of the card, with 9 blades on each fan. The fan shroud is black and blue which really makes the card stand out. On the fan shroud there are channels which will help the air to flow out the back of the case rather than into the case. The overall dimensions of the Vapor-X R9 290 is 12 x 4.5 x 1.85 inches (L x W x H), making this a rather long card. In addition, the thickness of the card at 1.85 inches will require the user of 2.5 PCI-E slots rather than just taking up 2.
Taking a look at the top edge of the video card there are several interesting features. On the far left side there is a little Sapphire logo button that switches between the Legacy and UEFI BIOS support; it ships in Legacy BIOS mode. Pressing the button activates the UEFI BIOS, providing support for Secure Boot and a faster boot time through UEFI. The button lights up in blue in UEFI mode. Looking beyond the button, we can see the large heatsink cooling fins used to cool the GPU, there are five heatpipes being used to distribute the heat, a large 10mm, two 8mm and two 6mm.
On the far right are the power connectors and the Sapphire logo, which lights up in three colors to indicate the temperature.
The power requirements of the Vapor-X 290 OC is for a 750W power supply. This power is transferred to the card by two 8-pin PCI-E power connectors. The Sapphire logo can be seen here, when it lights up, the color indicates the temperature of the card, Blue (0 to 60C), Yellow (60 to 80C) and Red (80C or higher). This has a tolerance of +/- 5C, so it is just a helpful way of getting an idea of the temperature, utilizing other tools is required to get a more accurate temperature. Where the back heat shield meets the PCB there is some thermal sealant coming out the top of the card, while not a major issue it can get a little messy for those that are extremely particular.
At the end of the card we have the usual display connectors; two dual-link DVI-D, HDMI, and DisplayPort 1.2. The DVI-D connectors support a resolution up to 2560×1600, while the HDMI and DisplayPort supports 4096×2160.
In addition, the HDMI and DisplayPort connectors will provide a 7.1 lossless audio stream, and 3D support. Finally, the DP connector supports Multi-Stream, allowing the user to connect up to four monitors from the single DP 1.2 connector.
The back of the video card is pretty plain since it is covered by the Vapor-X heat shield. Other than the top edge, this is probably the side the most users will see, even if it wasn’t the Vapor-X model, this is a great way to finish a high end video card giving it a sleek backplate.
On the back of the card is a tiny switch that controls the integrated fan controller. When the switch is set to off, all three fans operate under the same speed; however, when it is in the on position, the outside fans will only run when the GPU temperature is over 60C. This reduces the noise level created by the three fans.
Features and Specifications:
Vapor-X Technology
SAPPHIREs innovative Vapor-X cooling technology allows products to run not only cooler but also much quieter.
A Vapor-X product means a virtually silent gaming experience and more headroom to explore performance tweaking!
Dual BIOS (Legacy and UEFI) Support
This product supports both Legacy and UEFI BIOS. By factory default, the card itself is under Legacy mode. By pressing the button with SAPPHIRE logo, UEFI mode will be easily enabled.
| Specifications | |
| Display Support | supports up to 3 display monitor(s) without DisplayPort 4 x Maximum Display Monitor(s) support |
| Output | 1 x HDMI (with 3D) 1 x DisplayPort 1.2 2 x Dual-Link DVI-D |
| GPU | 1030 MHz Core Clock 28 nm Chip 2560 x Stream Processors |
| Video Memory | 4096 MB Size 512 -bit GDDR5 5600 MHz Effective |
| Dimension | 305(L)X 114(W)X 47(H) mm Size. 2.5 x slot |
| Software | Driver CD SAPPHIRE TriXX Utility |
| Accessory | 8-PIN to 4 PIN x2 Power Cable HDMI 1.  4a high speed 1.8 meter cable(Full Retail SKU only) |
| Warranty | 2 year warranty |
Let’s take a quick look at the retail packaging and accessories before starting some benchmarks.
Questions or comments?
View this thread in our forums!
Radeon R9 290/290X review | Eurogamer.net
Forged with its latest GCN 1.1 architecture at centre, the AMD R9 290X sports a cutting edge Hawaii XT chipset that sets out to better Nvidia’s cards — right up to the mighty GTX Titan — for a considerable discount. And unlike the 260X and 270X cards released earlier this year, which were simple rebrands of the existing HD 7790 and 7870 GPUs respectively, this is the company’s most forward-thinking entry in the series yet. In amongst support for the pending Mantle API, a unique on-chip TrueAudio sound processing technology makes the cut, plus an ambitious push for gaming at full 4K resolution.
At over £400 this is a wee bit on the dear side for many, but fortunately we now have a cut-down edition of the card in our hands as well: the R9 290, With a mind to achieve a more agreeable circa £300 price-tag, concessions are made to its specs in all the right places — all while still producing competitive results compared to Nvidia’s very best.
As part of this eager push for 4K gaming, both the R9 290 and 290X offer up the widest memory buses of any AMD card ever released, counting in at a remarkable 512-bit. This opens the floodgates to some blazing fast access speeds to its 4GB pool of 5GHz RAM, the result being an overall fill-rate of 320GB/s for each card. It’s a number that sounds excessive on paper, but any games operating at 2560×1440 and beyond with a lick of MSAA will soon see this statistic put to practical use. For the cheaper 290 variant, cutbacks are made in alternative areas: it takes the 1000MHz maximum core clock of the 290X down to 947MHz, active compute units from 176 to 160, while stream processors get chopped from 2816 to a still respectable count of 2560.
And that’s your lot. Remarkably, all other specs remain in place between AMD’s two new Hawaii chipset cards — but the biggest difference is in pricing. At the time of writing the R9 290 can be found for as little as £299, as compared to the approximate going rate of £420 for the elder 290X. It also massively undercuts Nvidia rivals such as the GTX 780 and 780 Ti despite bearing competitive specs, and comes in at 40 per cent of the GTX Titan’s current price of £760. For AMD’s plucky 290 to come even close to these contenders would be a remarkable feat indeed.
Caption
Attribution
With the spec differences being relatively minor given the sharp drop in price, it’s a surprise to find the 290X’s build quality, connections and approach to cooling go untouched in the transition to the 290. Here we have two dual-slot cards of matching lengths using simple matte plastics for the bulk of their casing.
Each is also punctuated with a single 75mm radial fan to direct airflow. Connectivity remains on par too, featuring two DVI-D ports, a single DisplayPort and a HDMI connection lining the end bracket. It must be said that the plastics of both the 290 and 290X do fall short of matching the premium metal finish of Nvidia’s 7xx series — and still somehow manage to weigh in at a heftier 0.95kg, as compared to the 0.87kg of Nvidia’s GTX 780 Ti.
Weight and dimensions are formidable, and so are the power demands. These AMD cards are driven by 8-pin and 6-pin PCIe power connectors planted up top, where the thermal design power (TDP) amounts to a stated maximum of 250 watts. This falls in line with the specifications of cards like the GTX 780 Ti or GTX Titan, and those intent on embracing this standard of GPU will need to double-check the wattage and connectors of their power supply before jumping in — indeed, we have a feeling that a 250W TDP may be a somewhat optimistic appraisal of the situation.
These high power requirements have a knock-on effect where heat and noise are concerned too. At idle we record an average of 45 degrees Celsius for both cards, but the temperature ramps up dramatically the moment we load up Metro Last Light at 2560×1440 on its highest settings. Pushing the limit at a constant 95 degrees Celsius, the fans kick into full gear to make absolutely sure it stabilises around that number and never veers northward. According to AMD, the card is designed for this temperature — but the sheer heat these cards radiate can’t help but give us pause.
In terms of acoustics, the end result is a loud whir that accompanies any gaming session, whereby comparison the noise of the rival 780 Ti stays mild even at its peak temperature of 81 degrees. All this is to say that AMD has produced two supremely hot cards in the 290 and 290X that brush against the limits of safe use — and on average it raises the ambient temperature of our PC case during lengthy gaming spells fairly quickly.
«Despite the tweaks in spec designed to cut the R9 290 down to size, the truth is that its real-life performance level is uncomfortably close to the Radeon R9 290X.»
Our first frame-rate test puts Battlefield 4 through its paces at 2560×1440 on ultra settings, with a focus on the open-ended Fishing in Baku stage battles. Included is the 4xMSAA setting to press the fill-rates of the R9 290 and 290X, where results are typically 2fps to the latter’s advantage.
Alternative analysis:
- Battlefield 4 1080: Radeon R9 290 vs. R9 290X
One curious design feature of the 290X is a discrete physical switch to the top edge of each PCB. This offers an option between the so-called Quiet and Uber modes relating to the fan, where speeds are capped at 40 and 55 per cent respectively. During long gaming sessions, the actual performance difference between these two settings is barely distinguishable in practice, however, and the fan’s loud acoustic signature remains an issue even on the lower threshold.
Raising the fan speed through software to 80 per cent does help keep an overhead in TDP, letting either card run at maximum clock speeds for longer without being throttled downwards. Even so, with the variance being so minor through the hardware switch alone, we press on with our tests on the default Uber mode.
In terms of methodology, we run with AMD drivers updated fully to Catalyst version 13.11, where our test rig features an Intel Core i7-3770k clocked to 4.3GHz, plus 16GB of 1600MHz DDR3 RAM. Our first run-through is with Battlefield 4 on both 1080p and 1440p, where we find anything less than the ultra graphics settings is an absolute cake-walk for either card. Pushing it up to maximum settings enforces a 4x pass of multi-sample AA (MSAA) too that helps to pinpoint the advantages of running with extremely high fill-rates.
And the result? At 1080p there’s not much between the two; dips are scarce during indoors gameplay on the Fishing in Baku stage, producing a monotone 60fps during the opening battles.
But the biggest in-game drop we see comes during a rigged explosion, taking the 290 down to the 40fps mark, while the 290X crashes to 50fps at the same point only to recover much more swiftly. However, for our synchronised cut-scene tests, featuring an effects-heavy slide down a collapsing building, this lead is marginal at best and only makes for a difference of 2fps in the 290X’s favour.
«With the quality settings dialled up, Crysis 3 offers a challenging workout for both top-end Radeons, with the 290X not delivering the extra frame-rates to justify the extra £100 on its price-point.»
The R9 290 and 290X compared in a Crysis 3 frame-rate analysis. Settings are cranked up as high as the game will officially allow, with very high settings and texture quality selected. We see how the game copes at 2560×1440 here with 2x SMAA enabled.
Alternative analysis:
- Crysis 3 1080p: Radeon R9 290 vs. R9 290X
For gaming at 2560×1440 with 4x MSAA engaged, something has to give though.
Right off the bat there’s a bigger performance deficit across the board, where it’s clear even 320GB/s of memory bandwidth isn’t up to the task of smooth 60fps playback. Both cards run Battlefield 4 at 40-50fps, with the more expensive GPU holding a 4fps lead on average during one shootout sequence inside a Shanghai skyscraper. For effects-heavy cut-scenes, though, the lowest reading this time is 18fps for the 290 card — and though the pricier 290X still gives us that same 2fps lead at points, it’s far less prolonged at this resolution.
Moving from Frostbite 3 to CryEngine 3, we see an even less stark difference between the two cards on Crysis 3. Set to very high settings with very high textures, plus 2x SMAA running over the top, the game struggles to hold 60fps at 1080p. Rather, it wavers when faced with triggered mines, swathes of tall grass or outdoor skirmishes in the Welcome to the Jungle campaign stage. The on-rails sequence closing this level brings effects-work to the forefront again; on both the 290 and 290X, performance typically falls to 50fps, with no apparent advantage to either card despite a price difference of well over £100.
To see if we can divide the two, then, we run the whole gamut of Crysis 3 tests once more at 2560×1440, where a lock to 30fps is immediately advisable at maxed out settings for the most fluid motion. Sadly, both cards push out practically like-for-like results during cut-scenes, very rarely able to extend above 45fps. By comparison, though peaks and troughs are a feature of both cards’ outputs during marshland battles, the 290X carries a marginal — if fleeting — edge here too.
«Does the R9 290 spoil the 290X’s market? The biggest difference we could find was in Tomb Raider, where the 290X enjoyed a nine per cent lead over its sibling.»
The R9 290 and 290X compared against equivalent Nvidia cards, the GTX 780 and 780 Ti. This test shows us how every benchmark runs at 1080p, with no v-sync and settings for each game at their highest.
| 1920×1080 | R9 290 | R9 290X | GTX 780 | GTX 780 Ti | GTX Titan |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BioShock Infinite, DX11 Ultra DDOF | 91. 0fps |
95.2fps | 98.7fps | 111.5fps | 101.1fps |
| Tomb Raider, Ultra, FXAA | 124.5fps | 135.3fps | 119.2fps | 141.0fps | 130.2fps |
| Metro 2033, Very High, 4x MSAA | 44.1fps | 51.5fps | 47.5fps | 51.8fps | 49.0fps |
| Metro: Last Light, Very High, SSAA | 43.2fps | 46.6fps | 40.7fps | 48.9fps | 43.0fps |
| Hitman: Absolution, Ultra, 8x MSAA | 52.3fps | 55.2fps | 47.0fps | 53.0fps | 49.8fps |
| Sleeping Dogs, Extreme | 64.8fps | 67.8fps | 61.0fps | 72.0fps | 66.5fps |
These Crysis 3 and Battlefield 4 tests show to what extent GPU specs translate to the practical reality of the gameplay experience, where in each case the target refresh is 60Hz. Even so, the traditional approach to benchmark testing, via an in-game option where allowed, gives each card a rigorous stress test that highlights the strengths of the GPUs with no frame-rate cap engaged.
Comparing AMD’s R9 290, 290X, and also Nvidia’s GTX 780 and 780 Ti cards across a range of scripted in-engine tests, we see how far games games are able to rise above the usual performance ceiling.
At 1080p these GPUs aren’t being stretched to their fullest extent, but the overwhelming impression is that 60fps is attainable even at the highest setting possible for most games if a cap is implemented. The exceptions, as ever, are 4A Games’ compute-heavy Metro 2033 and Last Light games, for which we have super-sample AA and very high tessellation enabled. 43fps is the best we get here on the 290, but amazingly this matches the GTX Titan on likewise settings. This is a trend that continues for Hitman: Absolution, for which the 290’s performance draws even with the 780 Ti by brute force of offering higher memory bandwidth to support its 8x MSAA. Equally, the card regularly betters the standard-grade 780 with games like Tomb Raider or BioShock Infinite.
There’s no question that the 290X is the better performer, meanwhile, but the question is: by how much? The margin of difference is at its highest with Tomb Raider, with a nine per cent lead over the 290 on average.
However, the delta between these two Hawaii cards takes a trivial turn when taking into account the likes of BioShock Infinite, or even Metro Last Light, where a 3fps advantage isn’t a perceptible one for the actual in-game experience. The 290X also falls in the same ballpark as the GTX 780 Ti’s in terms of overall frame-rates — despite the prices being circa £420 and £550 respectively. That’s a considerable leap in expense for just a 4fps lead in Nvidia’s favour across only a few games, which, at 1080p, frames both AMD cards as far better value propositions than their Nvidia counterparts.
«Moving up to 2560×1440, the wider memory bus of the dual 290 products becomes more important, putting the GTX 780 under further pressure.»
Benchmark tests at 2560×1440, running on graphics settings a step down from highest in each game. The results paint the 290 in the most positive light, where its lead over the GTX 780 only accelerates at this higher resolution.
| 2560×1440 | R9 290 | R9 290X | GTX 780 | GTX 780 Ti | GTX Titan |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BioShock Infinite, Very High | 96.8fps | 101.1fps | 91.5fps | 107.8fps | 97.4fps |
| Tomb Raider, High, FXAA | 112.1fps | 118.0fps | 114.6fps | 132.4fps | 119.3fps |
| Metro 2033, High, 4x MSAA | 42.1fps | 40.8fps | 39.5fps | 41.9fps | 41.2fps |
| Metro: Last Light, High, No SSAA | 55.7fps | 59.0fps | 50.0fps | 58.9fps | 53.0fps |
| Hitman: Absolution, High, 8x MSAA/2x MSAA | 38.9fps/ 64.7fps | 41.0fps/ 68.2fps | 32.0fps/ 57.2fps | 35.1fps/ 63.3fps | 34.3fps/ 59.5fps |
| Sleeping Dogs, High | 75.7fps | 78.4fps | 69.4fps | 79.3fps | 73.2fps |
Turning our heads to gaming at 1440p and 4k (3840×2160), we see AMD’s 290 truly coming into its own.
The sweet spot is almost certainly with gaming at this middle resolution of 1440p, where our test settings drop from those used at 1080p by one notch; from ultra to high. In effect, this creates a wider disparity between the 290 and the likes of the GTX 780, for which the frame-rate gap in Sleeping Dogs is taken to just over 6fps on average. The 290’s contention with the GTX Titan is now astoundingly close too — Tomb Raider turning out the only result in the Nvidia card’s favour, while the rest of the metrics are a cat’s whisker ahead for the AMD ‘budget’ card.
The spread of results predictably narrows for the 4K tests. Both the AMD 290 and 290X deliver the very best turnout for AMD-optimised titles like Hitman: Absolution, though the GTX 780 Ti remains the consummate leader for most titles when pressed to these extremes. The settings stand at the same levels as our 1440p tests, and the only game which comes out gracefully across the board is Tomb Raider with its borderline 60fps delivery.
Otherwise, we’re very much in frame-rate capping territory for the rest of our test roster. Many of the games struggle to hit half the full refresh we had hoped for — though it’s impressive indeed to see Metro: Last Light acquit itself at roughly 30fps across all cards. With the PC version of the upcoming Titanfall reported to be «playable» at 4K resolution through just a single GTX Titan card, a similar grade of performance can be expected for all cards in this bracket once it releases, given the similarities in results. That is, if you can track down an affordable monitor as well.
«There’s plenty of buzz around 4K PC gaming but the truth is that current top-end GPUs don’t provide enough raw horsepower to get the job done at higher settings.»
| 3840×2160 (4K) | R9 290 | R9 290X | GTX 780 | GTX 780 Ti | GTX Titan |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BioShock Infinite, Very High | 48.5fps | 50. 7fps |
43.1fps | 53.0fps | 48.2fps |
| Tomb Raider, High, FXAA | 56.5fps | 59.4fps | 56.3fps | 67.0fps | 60.2fps |
| Metro 2033, High, 4x MSAA | 19.5fps | 20.7fps | 17.5fps | 20.1fps | 18.2fps |
| Metro: Last Light, High, No SSAA | 29.0fps | 30.4fps | 27.1fps | 31.5fps | 28.2fps |
| Hitman: Absolution, High, 8x MSAA/2x MSAA | 18.6fps/ 34.2fps | 19.5fps/ 35.7fps | 13.7fps/ 28.5fps | 15.5fps/ 33.3fps | 15.3fps/ 31.3fps |
| Sleeping Dogs, High | 35.8fps | 38.4fps | 34.2fps | 41.5fps | 37.4fps |
In review, both of AMD’s Hawaii-based cards are undeniably hot and noisy by anyone’s standards. Running constantly at a near boiling temperature of 95 degrees Celsius, a lot of faith is being placed on the reliability of a single radial fan adjusted to its side.
However, the trade-off is evident when considering the value proposition: AMD’s R9 290X offers a grade of performance that either matches or exceeds Nvidia’s GTX Titan for just over the £400 mark at the time of writing, and puts up a fearsome challenge to the GTX 780 Ti GPU.
That’s still a big hole to leave in anyone’s wallet though. Hence, we’re relieved to see the emergence of the more cost-effective R9 290. This is a card that delivers perceptibly comparable results to its forebear in our Crysis 3 and Battlefield 4 tests, but crucially with the price down-marked even further to £300. The gameplay experience is so close, one might even view the 290 as a spoiler product to the 290X. The value proposition is undeniable: given that the GTX Titan retails at around the £760 point, the 290 is absolutely remarkable for slashing that by over half to achieve largely superior results — especially across our 1440p metrics. It’s rare to see a performance-per-pound differential as wild as this between two co-existing cards.
Nvidia retains bragging honours with its GTX 780 Ti — which we’re in the process of reviewing now — but at £560, that isn’t cheap either, and the performance differential against the R9 290 in particular may give you pause.
Overall, it’s sobering to admit that 4K gaming is still too much of a stretch for any of these cards at our preferred test settings, but it’s still very early days. Even so, we’d recommend 2.5k as standby in the meantime if you’re looking for an impactful pixel boost, especially given the wide availability of cheap, high quality panels at this resolution. But back to the question at hand: if you can grin and bear the thermal tightrope-walking of this new AMD GPU, and provided your PC is fully braced for the bold power requirements, the R9 290 comes highly recommended as a shrewd shortcut to the world of high-end GPUs. Slap on a water cooler, or wait for a customised third-party version with a superior heatsink and fan configuration, and we could be looking at an irresistible proposition.
Radeon R9 290 [in 3 benchmarks]
Radeon R9 290
- PCIe 3.0 x16 interface
- Core clock 947 MHz
- Video memory size 4 GB
- Memory type GDDR5
- Memory frequency 5000 MHz
- Maximum resolution
Description
AMD Starts Radeon R9 Sales290 November 5, 2013 for a suggested price of $399. This is a desktop video card based on the GCN 2.0 architecture and 28 nm manufacturing process, primarily aimed at gamers. It has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory at 5 GHz, and coupled with a 512-bit interface, this creates a bandwidth of 320.0 Gb / s.
In terms of compatibility, this is a dual-slot PCIe 3.0 x16 card. The length of the reference version is 275 mm. The connection requires one 6-pin cable and one 8-pin cable, and the power consumption is 275W.
It provides poor performance in tests and games at the level of
20.96%
from the leader, which is NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090.
Radeon R9
290
vs
GeForce RTX
4090
General information 9999 (A100 SXM4)
Value for money
To obtain an index, we compare the characteristics of video cards and their cost, taking into account the cost of other cards.
- 0
- 50
- 100
Features
Radeon R9 290’s general performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core clock, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. They indirectly talk about Radeon R9 performancegflops
Compatibility & Dimensions
Information on Radeon R9 290 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). 6.3
Benchmark tests
These are the results of Radeon R9 290 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 290
20.96
- Passmark
- 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
- Unigine Heaven 4.0
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: 26%
R9 290
8093
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 a resolution of 1920×1080, Fire Strike demonstrates fairly realistic graphics and is quite demanding on hardware.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
R9 290
11860
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 significant age, and it was released back in 2013.
Benchmark coverage: 1%
R9 290
1440
Mining hashrates
Radeon R9 290 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) | 545 Mh/s | |
| Ethereum / ETH (DaggerHashimoto) | 30 Mh/s | |
| Zcash / ZEC (Equihash) | 285 Sol/s |
Game tests
FPS in popular games on the Radeon R9 290, as well as compliance with system requirements.
Remember that the official requirements of the developers do not always match the data of real tests.
Relative performance
Radeon R9 290 overall performance compared to its closest competitors in desktop graphics cards.
AMD Radeon R9 Nano
104.87
NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN
100.67
AMD Radeon RX 470
100.05
AMD Radeon R9 290
100
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780
99.48
Intel UHD Graphics 770
98.62
Intel UHD Graphics 770 (Alder Lake)
98.62
Competitor from NVIDIA
We believe that the nearest equivalent to Radeon R9 290 from NVIDIA is GeForce GTX 780, which is slower by 1% and lower by 1 position in our rating on average.
GeForce GTX
780
Compare
Here are some NVIDIA Radeon R9 290 closest competitors:
NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK
111.
98
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 5 GB
108.25
NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN
100.67
AMD Radeon R9 290
100
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780
99.48
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
96.66
NVIDIA T1000 8 GB
96.09
Other video cards
Here we recommend several video cards that are more or less similar in performance to the reviewed one.
GeForce GTX
780
Compare
GeForce GTX
TITAN
Compare
Radeon R9
295X2
Compare
Radeon R9
390
Compare
GeForce GTX
TITAN BLACK
Compare
GeForce GTX
TITAN Z
Compare
Recommended Processors
According to our statistics, these processors are most often used with the Radeon R9 290.
FX
8350
3.5%
Core i5
3470
2.3%
FX
6300
2.3%
Core i5
4460
2.2%
Ryzen 5
3600
2.2%
Ryzen 5
2600
1.9%
Core i5
4690
1.9%
Core i7
3770
1.7%
Core i5
3570K
1.5%
Xeon E5
2689
1.
5%
User rating
Here you can see the rating of the video card by users, as well as put your own rating.
Tips and comments
Here you can ask a question about the Radeon R9 290, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.
Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
AMD Radeon R9 290 — 34 secret facts, review, features, reviews.
Top specifications and features
- Passmark score
- 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics test score
- Unigine Heaven 4.0 test score
- GPU base clock
- RAM
Passmark
AMD Radeon R9 290 test score:
7931
Best score:
29325
Performance
AMD Radeon R9 290:
1578
Best score:
Memory
AMD Radeon R9 290:
511
Best score:
General Information
AMD Radeon R9 290:
581
Best score:
Features
AMD Radeon R9 290:
169
Best score:
Description
AMD Radeon R9 graphics card290 on the GCN 2.
0 architecture has 6200 million transistors, those. process 28 nm. The frequency of the graphics core is 662 MHz. In terms of memory, 4 GB is installed here. DDR5, 1250MHz frequency and 320Gb/s maximum bandwidth. The texture size is 152 GTexels/s. FLOPS is 4.9.
In tests, the AMD Radeon R9 290 graphics card proved to be as follows — according to the Passmark benchmark, the model scored 7931 points. At the same time, the maximum number of points for today is 260261 points. According to the 3DMark benchmark, the video card scored 11623 points out of 49575 possible.
Directx version — 12. OpenGL version — 4.6. Regarding cooling, the heat dissipation requirements here are 275 watts.
In our tests, the video card scores 158876 points.
Why the AMD Radeon R9 290 is better than others
- Passmark score 7931 . This parameter is higher than that of 38%
- Unigine Heaven 4.0 test score 1411 . This parameter is higher than that of 9%
- Memory bandwidth 320 GB/s.
This parameter is higher than that of 64%
- 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics test score 11623 . This setting is lower than 20%
- GPU base clock speed 662 MHz. This parameter is lower than 63%
- RAM 4 GB. This parameter is lower than 36%
- Effective memory speed 4500 MHz. This parameter is lower than 44%
- GPU memory frequency 1250 MHz. This parameter is lower than that of 45%
Review AMD Radeon R9 290
Performance
Memory
general information
Functions
Ports
Tests in benchmarks
AMD Radeon R9 290 Review Highlights
GPU base clock
The graphics processing unit (GPU) has a high clock speed.
662MHz
max 2457
Average: 938 MHz
2457MHz
GPU memory frequency
This is an important aspect calculating memory bandwidth
1250MHz
max 16000
Average: 1326.
6 MHz
16000MHz
FLOPS
A measure of the processing power of a processor is called FLOPS.
4.9TFLOPS
max 1142.32
Average: 92.5 TFLOPS
1142.32TFLOPS
Turbo GPU
If the speed of the GPU drops below its limit, it can switch to a high clock speed to improve performance.
Show all
947MHz
max 2903
Average: 1375.8 MHz
2903MHz
Texture size
A certain number of textured pixels are displayed on the screen every second.
Show all
152 GTexels/s
max 756.8
Average: 145.
4 GTexels/s
756.8 GTexels/s
Architecture name
GCN 2.0
GPU name
Hawaii
Memory bandwidth
This is the speed at which the device stores or reads information.
320GB/s
max 2656
Average: 198.3 GB/s
2656GB/s
Effective memory speed
The effective memory clock speed is calculated from the size and information transfer rate of the memory. The performance of the device in applications depends on the clock frequency. The higher it is, the better.
Show all
4500 MHz
max 19500
Average: 6984.5 MHz
19500MHz
RAM
4 GB
max 128
Average: 4.
6 GB
128GB
GDDR Memory Versions
Latest GDDR memory versions provide high data transfer rates for improved overall performance
Show all
5
Average: 4.5
6
Memory bus width
A wide memory bus means that it can transfer more information in one cycle. This property affects the performance of the memory as well as the overall performance of the device’s graphics card.
Show all
512bit
max 8192
Average: 290.1bit
8192 bit
Release date
2013-11-05 00:00:00
Mean value:
Heat Dissipation (TDP)
The Heat Dissipation Requirements (TDP) is the maximum amount of energy that can be dissipated by the cooling system.
The lower the TDP, the less power will be consumed.
Show all
275W
Average: 140.4W
2W
Process technology
The small size of the semiconductor means it is a new generation chip.
28 nm
Average: 47.5 nm
4 nm
Number of transistors
6200 million
max 80000
Average: 5043 million
80000 million
PCIe version
Considerable speed of the expansion card used to connect the computer to peripherals is provided. The updated versions have impressive throughput and provide high performance.
Show all
3
Mean: 2.
8
5
Width
274mm
max 421.7
Average: 242.6mm
421.7 mm
Height
120mm
max 180
Average: 119.1mm
180mm
Purpose
Desktop
DirectX
Used in demanding games, providing enhanced graphics
12
max 12.2
Average: 11.1
12.2
OpenCL version
Used by some applications to enable GPU power for non-graphical calculations. The newer the version, the more functional it will be
Show all
2
max 4.
6
Average: 1.7
4.6
opengl version
Later versions provide better game graphics
4.6
max 4.6
Average: 4
4.6
Shader model version
6.3
max 6.6
Average: 5.5
6.6
Version Vulkan
1.2
Has HDMI output
HDMI output allows you to connect devices with HDMI or mini-HDMI ports. They can transmit video and audio to the display.
Show all
Yes
DisplayPort
Allows you to connect to a display using DisplayPort
one
Average: 2
4
DVI outputs
Allows connection to a display using DVI
2
Mean: 1.
4
3
Number of HDMI connectors
The more there are, the more devices can be connected at the same time (for example, game/TV type consoles)
Show all
one
Average: 1.1
3
HDMI
Yes
Passmark test score
7931
max 29325
Average: 7628.6
29325
3DMark Fire Strike Graphics test score
11623
max 49575
Average: 11859.1
49575
Unigine Heaven 4.0 test score
1411
max 4818
Average: 1291.1
4818
FAQ
How much RAM does AMD Radeon R9 290 have
AMD Radeon R9 290 has 4 GB.