AMD Radeon R9 290 vs NVIDIA Quadro CX
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R9 290 and NVIDIA Quadro CX 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 4 year(s) 11 month(s) later
- Around 57% higher core clock speed: 947 MHz vs 602 MHz
- 3.9x more texture fill rate: 151.5 GTexel / s vs 38.5 GTexel / s
- 13.3x more pipelines: 2560 vs 192
- 10.5x better floating-point performance: 4,849 gflops vs 462.3 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 55 nm
- 2.7x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 1536 MB
- 3.1x more memory clock speed: 5000 MHz vs 1600 MHz
- 8.7x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 8210 vs 947
- Around 68% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 763 vs 454
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 5 November 2013 vs 11 November 2008 |
| Core clock speed | 947 MHz vs 602 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 151.5 GTexel / s vs 38.5 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 2560 vs 192 |
| Floating-point performance | 4,849 gflops vs 462.3 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 55 nm |
| Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 1536 MB |
| Memory clock speed | 5000 MHz vs 1600 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 8210 vs 947 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 763 vs 454 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro CX
- Around 83% lower typical power consumption: 150 Watt vs 275 Watt
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 150 Watt vs 275 Watt |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 290
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro CX
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon R9 290 | NVIDIA Quadro CX |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 8210 | 947 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 763 | 454 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 102277 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 89.325 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1366.314 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 10.034 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 98.765 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 540.645 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6300 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3711 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3354 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6300 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3711 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3354 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3699 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon R9 290 | NVIDIA Quadro CX | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Code name | Hawaii | GT200B |
| Design | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
| Launch date | 5 November 2013 | 11 November 2008 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $399 | $1,999 |
| Place in performance rating | 339 | 340 |
| Type | Desktop | Workstation |
| Price now | $149.95 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 8.20 | |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 947 MHz | 602 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 4,849 gflops | 462.3 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Pipelines | 2560 | 192 |
| Texture fill rate | 151.5 GTexel / s | 38.5 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 275 Watt | 150 Watt |
| Transistor count | 6,200 million | 1,400 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x S-Video |
| VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 275 mm | 267 mm |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 10.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.3 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 1536 MB |
| Memory bandwidth | 320.0 GB / s | 76.8 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 512 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5000 MHz | 1600 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
Technologies |
||
| HD3D | ||
| LiquidVR | ||
| TressFX | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
