AMD Radeon RX 480 vs AMD Radeon R9 290
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon RX 480 and AMD Radeon R9 290 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 RX 480
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 7 month(s) later
- Around 18% higher core clock speed: 1120 MHz vs 947 MHz
- Around 20% higher texture fill rate: 182.3 GTexel / s vs 151.5 GTexel / s
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- Around 83% lower typical power consumption: 150 Watt vs 275 Watt
- Around 40% higher memory clock speed: 7000 MHz vs 5000 MHz
- Around 4% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 8609 vs 8281
- Around 16% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 103.851 vs 89.325
- Around 11% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 597.772 vs 540.645
- Around 77% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 11172 vs 6300
- Around 77% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 11172 vs 6300
- Around 13% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 4165 vs 3683
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 29 June 2016 vs 5 November 2013 |
Core clock speed | 1120 MHz vs 947 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 182.3 GTexel / s vs 151.5 GTexel / s |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 150 Watt vs 275 Watt |
Memory clock speed | 7000 MHz vs 5000 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 8609 vs 8281 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 103.851 vs 89.325 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 597.772 vs 540.645 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 11172 vs 6300 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3719 vs 3711 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3361 vs 3354 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 11172 vs 6300 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3719 vs 3711 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3361 vs 3354 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 4165 vs 3683 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 290
- Around 11% higher pipelines: 2560 vs 2304
- 836x better floating-point performance: 4,849 gflops vs 5.8 TFLOPs
- 2.6x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 102277 vs 39250
- Around 78% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1366.314 vs 769.541
- Around 32% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 10.034 vs 7.593
- Around 46% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 98.765 vs 67.879
Specifications (specs) | |
Pipelines | 2560 vs 2304 |
Floating-point performance | 4,849 gflops vs 5.8 TFLOPs |
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 102277 vs 39250 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1366.314 vs 769.541 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 10.034 vs 7.593 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 98.765 vs 67.879 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon RX 480
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 290
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 RX 480 | AMD Radeon R9 290 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 8609 | 8281 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 776 | 776 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 39250 | 102277 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 103.851 | 89.325 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 769.541 | 1366.314 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 7.593 | 10.034 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 67.879 | 98.765 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 597.772 | 540.645 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 11172 | 6300 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3719 | 3711 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3361 | 3354 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 11172 | 6300 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3719 | 3711 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3361 | 3354 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 4165 | 3683 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon RX 480 | AMD Radeon R9 290 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 4.0 | GCN 2.0 |
Code name | Ellesmere | Hawaii |
Design | Radeon RX 400 Series | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series |
GCN generation | 4th Gen | |
Launch date | 29 June 2016 | 5 November 2013 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $229 | $399 |
Place in performance rating | 354 | 357 |
Price now | $299.99 | |
Type | Desktop | Desktop |
Value for money (0-100) | 39.12 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1266 MHz | |
Compute units | 36 | |
Core clock speed | 1120 MHz | 947 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 5.8 TFLOPs | 4,849 gflops |
GPU Power | 110 Watt | |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 2304 | 2560 |
Stream Processors | 2304 | |
Texture fill rate | 182.3 GTexel / s | 151.5 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 150 Watt | 275 Watt |
Transistor count | 5,700 million | 6,200 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
DisplayPort support | ||
Dual-link DVI support | ||
Eyefinity | ||
HDMI | ||
VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Bridgeless CrossFire | ||
Bus support | n / a | |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Length | 241 mm | 275 mm |
Recommended system power (PSU) | 500 Watt | |
Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 | 12 |
Mantle | ||
OpenCL | 2.0 | |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 4 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 224 GB/s | 320.0 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 256 bit | 512 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 7000 MHz | 5000 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
4K H264 Decode | ||
4K H264 Encode | ||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
AMD Radeon™ Chill | ||
AMD Radeon™ ReLive | ||
AppAcceleration | ||
CrossFire | ||
DisplayPort 1.3 HBR / 1.4 HDR Ready | ||
Enduro | ||
FreeSync | ||
FRTC | ||
H265/HEVC Decode | ||
H265/HEVC Encode | ||
HD3D | ||
HDMI 2.0b | ||
HDMI 4K Support | ||
LiquidVR | ||
PowerTune | ||
TressFX | ||
TrueAudio | ||
Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
Virtual Super Resolution (VSR) | ||
VR Ready | ||
ZeroCore |