AMD Radeon R9 290 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R9 290 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 290

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 1 month(s) later
• Around 93% higher texture fill rate: 151.5 GTexel / s vs 78.4 billion / sec
• 2.7x more pipelines: 2560 vs 960
• 2.4x better floating-point performance: 4,849 gflops vs 1,981 gflops
• 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
• 833.3x more memory clock speed: 5000 MHz vs 6.0 GB/s
• 2x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 8210 vs 4017
• Around 57% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 763 vs 487
• 9x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 102277 vs 11364
• 2.9x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 89.325 vs 30.505
• Around 94% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1366.314 vs 705.293
• 3.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 10.034 vs 3.085
• 2.8x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 98.765 vs 35.416
• 8.6x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 540.645 vs 62.69
• Around 76% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6300 vs 3581
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3711 vs 3690
• Around 76% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6300 vs 3581
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3711 vs 3690
• 2.8x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3699 vs 1307

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660

• Around 3% higher core clock speed: 980 MHz vs 947 MHz
• Around 96% lower typical power consumption: 140 Watt vs 275 Watt

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 290
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	8210 4017
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	763 487
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	102277 11364
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	89.325 30.505
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1366.314 705.293
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	10.034 3.085
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	98.765 35.416
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	540.645 62.69
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	6300 3581
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3711 3690
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3354 3365
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	6300 3581
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3711 3690
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3354 3365
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	3699 1307

Compare specifications (specs)