AMD Radeon R9 M290X vs AMD Radeon RX 5700 Comparison

The AMD Radeon R9 M290X and the AMD Radeon RX 5700 represent two distinct eras of AMD mobile and desktop graphics, separated by five years of architectural evolution. The data shows a decisive generational leap, with the RX 5700 dominating in every benchmark where both cards have scores, but the R9 M290X still holds its own as a capable legacy part for its time. This analysis compares the two based purely on the provided benchmark results and specifications.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data available for direct comparison is limited to two compute-oriented tests, and in both, the outcome is unequivocal. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 delivers a crushing victory, demonstrating the massive performance headroom of the newer RDNA architecture.

In the Geekbench Metal test, the RX 5700 scores 86,079 points against the R9 M290X’s 24,524 points. That is a delta of -71.5% for the older card, meaning the RX 5700 is roughly 3.5 times faster. This is not a marginal improvement; it is a complete overhaul in raw compute throughput. The R9 M290X’s score is closer to its nearest rivals in the database, such as the AMD Radeon RX 6600M (23,273) and the NVIDIA P106-100 (23,249), placing it in a performance tier that is now entry-level at best.

The Geekbench OpenCL result tells a similar story. The RX 5700 posts 69,603 points, while the R9 M290X manages only 22,028. The delta is -68.4%, confirming that the RX 5700’s advantage is consistent across different compute APIs. The R9 M290X’s average benchmark score of 23,276 is remarkably close to its Metal score, suggesting that its performance is stable but limited. In contrast, the RX 5700’s OpenCL score is lower than its Metal score, indicating that its architecture scales better with Apple’s Metal API than with the more generic OpenCL framework.

Looking at the broader benchmark suite for the RX 5700, its strengths extend beyond compute. In Passmark G3D, it scores 14,314, and in Passmark GPU Compute, it hits 6,517. These are strong results for a card that also manages 877 in Passmark G2D for 2D graphics work. The RX 5700’s average benchmark score of 22,170 puts it in the 67th percentile of all GPUs, just ahead of its rival the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB (21,856) and slightly behind the AMD Radeon RX 6700S (22,154). The R9 M290X, with an average score of 23,276, actually sits in the 68th percentile, which is marginally higher than the RX 5700’s percentile—a statistical quirk explained by the different pool of GPUs and benchmark loads used for each card’s ranking.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins in Geekbench Metal performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5700 wins decisively with a score of 86,079 versus 24,524 for the R9 M290X, a delta of -71.5% for the older card.

Q: How does the RX 5700 compare to its immediate rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The RX 5700’s average score of 22,170 is 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6700S (22,154) and 1.4% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB (21,856), but it trails the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile by 1.2% and the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT by 1.7%.

Q: Is the R9 M290X still competitive with modern entry-level GPUs?

A: Based on average scores, the R9 M290X (23,276) is essentially tied with the AMD Radeon RX 6600M (23,273) and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 (23,250), showing it can still trade blows with low-end modern parts in compute workloads.

Q: What is the performance gap in OpenCL compute?

A: The RX 5700 leads with 69,603 points against 22,028 for the R9 M290X, meaning the older card delivers only about 31.6% of the newer card’s performance in this test.

Q: Does the RX 5700 have a higher transistor density?

A: Yes, the RX 5700’s 7 nm process packs 41.0M transistors per mm², while the R9 M290X’s 28 nm process achieves only 13.2M per mm².

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is vast, reflecting a complete redesign of AMD’s graphics core. The R9 M290X is built on the GCN 1.0 architecture with the Neptune chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 2,800 million transistors into a 212 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 13.2M / mm². This is a mature, power-efficient design for its era, but it is fundamentally a scalar architecture designed for the mid-2010s.

In contrast, the RX 5700 uses the RDNA 1.0 architecture with the Navi 10 chip, also from TSMC but on a much more advanced 7 nm process. This node shrinks the physical size but allows for a massive increase in complexity: 10,300 million transistors on a 251 mm² die, giving a density of 41.0M / mm²—more than three times that of the older chip. RDNA 1.0 is a significant departure from GCN, focusing on higher clock speeds and better instruction-level parallelism, which is reflected in the benchmark scores. The RX 5700 also supports Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 (12_1), while the R9 M290X is limited to Vulkan 1.2.170 and DirectX 12 (11_1). The newer card’s API support opens the door to more modern game features and better driver optimization.

The memory subsystem also highlights the generational gap. The R9 M290X uses GDDR5 memory running at 4.8 Gbps effective with a 256-bit bus, yielding 153.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 5700 uses GDDR6 at 14 Gbps effective on the same 256-bit bus, tripling bandwidth to 448.0 GB/s. This is critical for high-resolution textures and compute workloads that are memory-bound.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge sharply across nearly every specification field. The R9 M290X has 1,280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 render output units (ROPs). The RX 5700 more than doubles these counts: 2,304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. This explains the RX 5700’s higher fill rates—110.4 GPixel/s pixel rate and 248.4 GTexel/s texture rate versus the R9 M290X’s 28.80 GPixel/s and 72.00 GTexel/s.

Clock speeds are also drastically different. The R9 M290X runs at a 850 MHz base and 900 MHz boost, while the RX 5700 operates at 1,465 MHz base, 1,625 MHz game clock, and 1,725 MHz boost. The floating-point performance reflects this: the RX 5700 delivers 7.949 TFLOPS of FP32 compute versus 2.304 TFLOPS for the older card. The RX 5700 also supports 15.90 TFLOPS of FP16 compute (2:1 ratio), a feature entirely absent from the R9 M290X’s specifications.

Memory capacity doubles from 4 GB on the R9 M290X to 8 GB on the RX 5700. Power draw is higher on the newer card at 180 W TDP versus 100 W, and it requires a 450 W suggested PSU and 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin power connectors, while the R9 M290X is an MXM Module with no external power connectors. The RX 5700 is a Dual-slot card measuring 268 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 36 mm in width, with display outputs of 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The R9 M290X has portable-device-dependent outputs. The RX 5700 also uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the R9 M290X is limited to PCIe 3.0 x16.

The Verdict

The data leaves no room for ambiguity: the AMD Radeon RX 5700 is the superior product by every measurable metric. If you prioritize raw performance, modern API support, and high-bandwidth memory, the RX 5700 is the clear choice. Its Geekbench Metal score is 3.5x higher, and its OpenCL score is 3.2x higher than the R9 M290X, making it suitable for demanding gaming and compute applications. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth provide a future-proofing buffer that the 4 GB GDDR5 R9 M290X cannot match.

However, the R9 M290X is not without its merits, particularly for a specific use case. Its 100 W TDP and MXM Module form factor make it a low-power, compact solution for thin-and-light laptops or embedded systems where space and thermal headroom are at a premium. Its average benchmark score of 23,276 places it alongside modern entry-level parts like the RX 6600M, meaning it is still capable of light gaming and general compute tasks. For users with a legacy MXM slot who cannot upgrade to a new chassis, the R9 M290X remains a functional, if dated, option.

In summary, the RX 5700 is the definitive winner for any scenario where performance is the priority. The R9 M290X should only be considered if the form factor and power envelope are non-negotiable constraints. The architectural leap from GCN 1.0 to RDNA 1.0, combined with the process node shrink, makes the RX 5700 the only rational choice for new builds or upgrades where size and power are not limiting factors.