AMD Radeon Pro W5700 vs AMD Radeon R9 M290X Comparison

AMD Radeon Pro W5700 vs AMD Radeon R9 M290X

The recorded benchmark data shows a decisive generational gap between these two AMD graphics cards. In every shared test, the Radeon Pro W5700 outperforms the Radeon R9 M290X by a wide margin, with the smallest recorded advantage exceeding 230%. The Radeon Pro W5700 is the clear performance leader, while the Radeon R9 M290X, an older mobile-oriented part, trails substantially in all compute and graphics workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains two common benchmark results for both cards: Geekbench Metal and Geekbench OpenCL. In both tests, the Radeon Pro W5700 records a dominant victory. On Geekbench Metal, the W5700 scores 89,557 points, while the R9 M290X scores 24,524 points. This translates to a 265.2% advantage for the W5700, meaning it delivers more than three and a half times the Metal performance of the older card. On Geekbench OpenCL, the W5700 scores 74,613 points against the R9 M290X's 22,028 points, a 238.7% lead. Both results place the W5700 far outside the performance envelope of the R9 M290X.

The average benchmark score, computed across all recorded tests, reinforces this picture. The W5700 holds an average score of 25,726, placing it in the 71st percentile among all GPUs in the database. The R9 M290X averages 23,276, which sits in the 68th percentile. While the percentile gap appears modest, the average score difference of 2,450 points hides the fact that the W5700 was tested across ten different workloads, including DirectX 9 through 12, compute, and 2D tests, whereas the R9 M290X only has two recorded results. In the two tests where both cards appear, the W5700's advantage is enormous.

Looking at the W5700's nearest rivals in the database, its average score of 25,726 sits within 0.5% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile (25,740, a 0.1% deficit), the AMD Radeon RX 6700M (25,633, a 0.4% advantage), the AMD FirePro D700 (25,842, a 0.4% deficit), and the AMD FirePro W7100 (25,856, a 0.5% deficit). This places the W5700 in a competitive tier with modern high-end mobile and older workstation GPUs, despite its professional focus. For the R9 M290X, its average score of 23,276 is effectively tied with the AMD Radeon RX 6600M (23,273, 0% difference), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 (23,250, a 0.1% edge), the NVIDIA P106-100 (23,249, a 0.1% edge), and the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 (23,315, a 0.2% deficit). The R9 M290X thus sits in a much lower performance class, roughly 10% below the W5700's average score, and its individual benchmark results are far weaker.

The W5700's individual benchmark scores show its strengths. In Passmark G3D, it scores 14,520, and in Passmark GPU Compute, it scores 6,495. Its Passmark DirectX 9 score is 225, DirectX 10 is 88, DirectX 11 is 104, and DirectX 12 is 54. The 2D graphics test yields 899 points. These figures, combined with the Geekbench results, indicate a card that handles both modern and legacy APIs with consistent competence. The R9 M290X has no recorded Passmark results, so no direct comparison is possible outside the two Geekbench tests, but the available data suggests the W5700 would outperform it across the board given the scale of the Metal and OpenCL deltas.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher Geekbench Metal score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W5700 scores 89,557, which is 265.2% higher than the R9 M290X's 24,524. The W5700 wins decisively.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon Pro W5700 compare to the R9 M290X in OpenCL compute?

A: The W5700 records 74,613 points in Geekbench OpenCL, while the R9 M290X scores 22,028. The W5700 leads by 238.7%.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each card?

A: The W5700 has an average benchmark score of 25,726, placing it in the 71st percentile of all GPUs. The R9 M290X averages 23,276, placing it in the 68th percentile.

Q: Are there any benchmark tests where the R9 M290X wins?

A: No. In the two recorded head-to-head tests (Geekbench Metal and OpenCL), the W5700 wins both. The R9 M290X records zero wins in the database.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two cards?

A: The W5700 has a transistor density of 41.0 million transistors per square millimeter, while the R9 M290X has a density of 13.2 million per square millimeter. The W5700 packs over three times the density.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel rate?

A: The W5700 achieves 120.3 gigapixels per second, compared to the R9 M290X's 28.80 gigapixels per second. The W5700 is over four times faster in this metric.

The Verdict

The data points to a single conclusion: the AMD Radeon Pro W5700 is the superior GPU for any workload represented in the database. Its 265.2% lead in Metal and 238.7% lead in OpenCL are not marginal improvements but rather multi-generational leaps. The W5700's average score of 25,726, its 71st percentile ranking, and its proximity to rivals like the GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile (within 0.1%) confirm that it operates in a much higher performance tier than the R9 M290X, which sits near the 68th percentile and is tied with mid-range mobile GPUs like the RX 6600M.

For users deciding between these two, the choice depends on workload compatibility rather than performance, since the W5700 wins every recorded test. The R9 M290X, with its 4 GB of memory, lower clock speeds, and older architecture, is only suitable for legacy applications or systems with strict power and form-factor constraints. The W5700, with its 8 GB memory, higher bandwidth, and modern feature set, is the appropriate pick for any task requiring current API support or high compute throughput. The R9 M290X cannot be recommended for any benchmark-covered use case where the W5700 is available, as the performance gap is too large to ignore.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The W5700 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The R9 M290X uses 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, also on a 256-bit bus, but with only 153.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The W5700's memory clock runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), while the R9 M290X's memory clock is 1200 MHz (4.8 Gbps effective). The W5700 has 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output pipelines. The R9 M290X has 1280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The W5700's base clock is 1400 MHz with a boost clock of 1880 MHz; the R9 M290X's base clock is 850 MHz with a boost clock of 900 MHz. The W5700's peak pixel rate is 120.3 GPixel/s and texture rate is 270.7 GTexel/s, while the R9 M290X achieves 28.80 GPixel/s and 72.00 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance is 8.663 TFLOPS for the W5700 versus 2.304 TFLOPS for the R9 M290X. The W5700 also supports FP16 at 17.33 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), a feature the R9 M290X does not list.

Power and physical specifications diverge sharply. The W5700 has a TDP of 205 W, requires a 550 W power supply, uses dual-slot cooling, and needs one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector. The R9 M290X has a TDP of 100 W, uses an MXM module form factor, and does not require external power connectors. The W5700 connects via PCIe 4.0 x16, while the R9 M290X uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The W5700 measures 267 mm in length (10.5 inches) and 111 mm in height (4.4 inches), while the R9 M290X has no listed dimensions due to its modular design. Display outputs also differ: the W5700 provides five mini-DisplayPort 1.4a connectors and one USB Type-C port, whereas the R9 M290X's outputs are described as "portable device dependent."

The W5700 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The R9 M290X supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The API version differences are modest, but the W5700's newer DirectX feature level and Vulkan revision reflect its more recent design.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is the root cause of the performance disparity. The W5700 is built on the RDNA 1.0 architecture, using the Navi 10 chip, and is fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It contains 10,300 million transistors on a 251 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 41.0 million per square millimeter. The R9 M290X uses the older GCN 1.0 architecture with the Neptune chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 2,800 million transistors on a 212 mm² die, yielding a density of 13.2 million per square millimeter. The 7 nm process allows the W5700 to pack nearly four times more transistors per area, which directly enables its higher core counts and clock speeds.

The W5700's RDNA 1.0 architecture also supports FP16 computation at a 2:1 ratio, which is absent from the R9 M290X's specifications. The W5700's generation is listed as "Radeon Pro Navi (Navi Series)," while the R9 M290X belongs to the "Gem System (R9 M200)" generation. The W5700's predecessor is the Radeon Pro Vega, and the R9 M290X's predecessor is listed as "Solar System," with its successor being "Polaris Mobile." These generational labels confirm that the R9 M290X predates the W5700 by several product cycles, with a release date in early 2014 versus late 2019 for the W5700. The W5700 has no successor listed, while the R9 M290X was replaced by Polaris Mobile.

The R9 M290X does not list any FP16 performance, ray tracing cores, or tensor cores, and neither card has ray tracing or tensor hardware. The W5700's RDNA architecture focuses on efficient compute and graphics throughput, while GCN 1.0 represents AMD's first-generation unified shader design. This architectural evolution explains why the W5700 achieves higher clock speeds (1880 MHz boost versus 900 MHz boost) and nearly four times the FP32 throughput despite a smaller process node advantage in raw die size.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon Pro W5700 wins every benchmark category recorded in the database. In Geekbench Metal, it leads by 265.2%, making it the clear choice for macOS-style Metal compute workloads. In Geekbench OpenCL, it leads by 238.7%, dominating cross-platform OpenCL tasks. Its Passmark scores, though not compared directly to the R9 M290X, show strong results in DirectX 9 (225), DirectX 11 (104), DirectX 12 (54), G3D (14,520), and GPU Compute (6,495). The W5700 also wins on memory bandwidth (448.0 GB/s versus 153.6 GB/s), pixel rate (120.3 GPixel/s versus 28.80 GPixel/s), texture rate (270.7 GTexel/s versus 72.00 GTexel/s), and FP32 compute (8.663 TFLOPS versus 2.304 TFLOPS). For any application that uses these resources, the W5700 is the superior pick.

The R9 M290X has no benchmark wins in the database. Its only advantage lies in physical characteristics: a lower TDP of 100 W versus 205 W, no external power connectors, and an MXM module form factor that suits compact or mobile systems. It also has a smaller die (212 mm² versus 251 mm²), though that is irrelevant to performance. For users seeking a low-power, slotless GPU for a legacy mobile chassis, the R9 M290X might fit, but the performance data offers no scenario where it outperforms the W5700. The W5700 is the recommended card for all compute, graphics, and professional workloads covered by the recorded benchmarks.