NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z vs AMD Radeon R9 290

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z 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 TITAN Z

• Videocard is newer: launch date 6 month(s) later
• 2.2x more texture fill rate: 338 billion / sec vs 151.5 GTexel / s
• 2.3x more pipelines: 2x 2880 vs 2560
• 2.1x better floating-point performance: 2x 5,046 gflops vs 4,849 gflops
• 3x more maximum memory size: 12 GB vs 4 GB
• Around 8% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 8905 vs 8237
• Around 29% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8124 vs 6300
• Around 29% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8124 vs 6300
• 4.6x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 17055 vs 3699

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 290

• Around 34% higher core clock speed: 947 MHz vs 705 MHz
• Around 36% lower typical power consumption: 275 Watt vs 375 Watt
• 714.3x more memory clock speed: 5000 MHz vs 7.0 GB/s
• Around 20% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 765 vs 639
• 4.5x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 102277 vs 22732
• Around 34% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 89.325 vs 66.419
• Around 8% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1366.314 vs 1261.593
• Around 27% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 10.034 vs 7.89
• 5.5x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 98.765 vs 17.882
• Around 74% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 540.645 vs 309.857
• Around 54% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3711 vs 2413
• Around 51% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3354 vs 2226
• Around 54% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3711 vs 2413
• Around 51% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3354 vs 2226

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 290

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	8905 8237
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	639 765
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	22732 102277
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	66.419 89.325
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1261.593 1366.314
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	7.89 10.034
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	17.882 98.765
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	309.857 540.645
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	8124 6300
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2413 3711
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2226 3354
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	8124 6300
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2413 3711
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2226 3354
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	17055 3699

Compare specifications (specs)