AMD Radeon R9 290 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R9 290 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 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 5 month(s) later
- Around 10% higher core clock speed: 947 MHz vs 863 MHz
- Around 11% higher pipelines: 2560 vs 2304
- Around 17% better floating-point performance: 4,849 gflops vs 4,156 gflops
- Around 33% higher maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 3 GB
- Around 3% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 8210 vs 7986
- Around 29% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 763 vs 590
- 4.4x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 102277 vs 23233
- Around 55% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 89.325 vs 57.735
- Around 8% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1366.314 vs 1269.688
- Around 82% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 10.034 vs 5.505
- 2.6x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 98.765 vs 37.407
- 3.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 540.645 vs 174.323
- Around 33% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3699 vs 2777
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 5 November 2013 vs 23 May 2013 |
| Core clock speed | 947 MHz vs 863 MHz |
| Pipelines | 2560 vs 2304 |
| Floating-point performance | 4,849 gflops vs 4,156 gflops |
| Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 3 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 8210 vs 7986 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 763 vs 590 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 102277 vs 23233 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 89.325 vs 57.735 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1366.314 vs 1269.688 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 10.034 vs 5.505 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 98.765 vs 37.407 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 540.645 vs 174.323 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3699 vs 2777 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780
- Around 6% higher texture fill rate: 160.5 billion / sec vs 151.5 GTexel / s
- Around 10% lower typical power consumption: 250 Watt vs 275 Watt
- Around 20% higher memory clock speed: 6008 MHz vs 5000 MHz
- Around 44% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 9064 vs 6300
- Around 44% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 9064 vs 6300
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Texture fill rate | 160.5 billion / sec vs 151.5 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 250 Watt vs 275 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 6008 MHz vs 5000 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9064 vs 6300 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 vs 3711 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 3354 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9064 vs 6300 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 vs 3711 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 3354 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 290
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780
| 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 |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon R9 290 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 8210 | 7986 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 763 | 590 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 102277 | 23233 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 89.325 | 57.735 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1366.314 | 1269.688 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 10.034 | 5.505 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 98.765 | 37.407 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 540.645 | 174.323 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6300 | 9064 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3711 | 3714 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3354 | 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6300 | 9064 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3711 | 3714 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3354 | 3358 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3699 | 2777 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon R9 290 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | Kepler |
| Code name | Hawaii | GK110 |
| Design | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
| Launch date | 5 November 2013 | 23 May 2013 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $399 | $649 |
| Place in performance rating | 339 | 451 |
| Type | Desktop | Desktop |
| Price now | $740.99 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 12.94 | |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 947 MHz | 863 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 4,849 gflops | 4,156 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 2560 | 2304 |
| Texture fill rate | 151.5 GTexel / s | 160.5 billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 275 Watt | 250 Watt |
| Transistor count | 6,200 million | 7,080 million |
| Boost clock speed | 900 MHz | |
| CUDA cores | 2304 | |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 95 °C | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI..., 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| VGA | ||
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | |
| G-SYNC support | ||
| HDCP | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
| Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 275 mm | 10.5" (26.7 cm) |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | One 8-pin and one 6-pin |
| Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
| Minimum recommended system power | 600 Watt | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.3 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 3 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 320.0 GB / s | 288.4 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 512 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5000 MHz | 6008 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
| HD3D | ||
| LiquidVR | ||
| TressFX | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
| 3D Gaming | ||
| 3D Vision | ||
| 3D Vision Live | ||
| Adaptive VSync | ||
| Blu Ray 3D | ||
| CUDA | ||
| FXAA | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| PhysX | ||
| TXAA | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon R9 290 with others
AMDRadeon R9 290 vs
ATIFireMV 2260
AMDRadeon R9 290 vs
NVIDIAQuadro CX
AMDRadeon R9 290 vs
AMDFirePro W9000
AMDRadeon R9 290 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX TITAN Z
AMDRadeon R9 290 vs
NVIDIAQuadro M5000
AMDRadeon R9 290 vs
AMDRadeon RX 580
