NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 vs AMD Radeon R9 290
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 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 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
- Videocard is newer: launch date 10 month(s) later
- Around 11% higher core clock speed: 1050 MHz vs 947 MHz
- Around 86% lower typical power consumption: 148 Watt vs 275 Watt
- Around 16% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 9639 vs 8300
- Around 18% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 105.107 vs 89.325
- Around 83% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 11499 vs 6300
- Around 83% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 11499 vs 6300
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 19 September 2014 vs 5 November 2013 |
| Core clock speed | 1050 MHz vs 947 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 148 Watt vs 275 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 9639 vs 8300 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 105.107 vs 89.325 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 11499 vs 6300 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 11499 vs 6300 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 290
- Around 39% higher texture fill rate: 151.5 GTexel / s vs 109 billion / sec
- Around 54% higher pipelines: 2560 vs 1664
- Around 24% better floating-point performance: 4,849 gflops vs 3,920 gflops
- 714.3x more memory clock speed: 5000 MHz vs 7.0 GB/s
- Around 1% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 776 vs 770
- 3.6x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 102277 vs 28428
- Around 11% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1366.314 vs 1225.96
- Around 15% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 10.034 vs 8.76
- 2.8x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 98.765 vs 35.714
- Around 10% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 540.645 vs 489.884
- Around 2% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3684 vs 3625
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Texture fill rate | 151.5 GTexel / s vs 109 billion / sec |
| Pipelines | 2560 vs 1664 |
| Floating-point performance | 4,849 gflops vs 3,920 gflops |
| Memory clock speed | 5000 MHz vs 7.0 GB/s |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 776 vs 770 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 102277 vs 28428 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1366.314 vs 1225.96 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 10.034 vs 8.76 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 98.765 vs 35.714 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 540.645 vs 489.884 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3711 vs 3698 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3354 vs 3340 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3711 vs 3698 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3354 vs 3340 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3684 vs 3625 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
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 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 | AMD Radeon R9 290 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 9639 | 8300 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 770 | 776 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 28428 | 102277 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 105.107 | 89.325 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1225.96 | 1366.314 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 8.76 | 10.034 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 35.714 | 98.765 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 489.884 | 540.645 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 11499 | 6300 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3698 | 3711 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3340 | 3354 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 11499 | 6300 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3698 | 3711 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3340 | 3354 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3625 | 3684 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 | AMD Radeon R9 290 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 2.0 |
| Code name | GM204 | Hawaii |
| Launch date | 19 September 2014 | 5 November 2013 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $329 | $399 |
| Place in performance rating | 364 | 360 |
| Price now | $407.76 | |
| Type | Desktop | Desktop |
| Value for money (0-100) | 28.59 | |
| Design | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1178 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 1050 MHz | 947 MHz |
| CUDA cores | 1664 | |
| Floating-point performance | 3,920 gflops | 4,849 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 98 °C | |
| Pipelines | 1664 | 2560 |
| Texture fill rate | 109 billion / sec | 151.5 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 148 Watt | 275 Watt |
| Transistor count | 5,200 million | 6,200 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | |
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort, Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| G-SYNC support | ||
| HDCP | ||
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
| Multi monitor support | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 10.5" (26.7 cm) | 275 mm |
| Recommended system power (PSU) | 500 Watt | |
| SLI options | 4x | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 6-pins | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 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 | 7.0 GB/s | 5000 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision | ||
| Adaptive Vertical Sync | ||
| CUDA | ||
| GameStream | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| SLI | ||
| Surround | ||
| HD3D | ||
| LiquidVR | ||
| TressFX | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 with others
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 970 vs
ATIFireGL V8600
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 970 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 980
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 970 vs
NVIDIATesla P4
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 970 vs
AMDRadeon Pro Vega 16
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 970 vs
AMDRadeon Pro 5300M
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 970 vs
IntelArc A370M
