AMD Radeon R9 M290X vs AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data shows a split decision between the AMD Radeon R9 M290X and the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT, with each card claiming one benchmark victory. The most decisive result comes from the Geekbench Metal test, where the RX 6650 XT scores 97,969 points against the R9 M290X's 24,524 points, a massive 75% margin in favor of the newer card. This is not a close contest; the RX 6650 XT delivers roughly four times the Metal performance, reflecting the generational leap in compute and graphics architecture.

However, the Geekbench OpenCL result flips the narrative entirely. Here, the R9 M290X scores 22,028 points, while the RX 6650 XT manages only 10,111 points. That gives the older card a 117.9% advantage, meaning it more than doubles the RX 6650 XT's OpenCL score. This is an unusual outcome, as OpenCL workloads often favor raw compute throughput, and the R9 M290X's GCN architecture appears to handle this specific API far more efficiently than the RDNA 2 part. The delta is stark, and it suggests that the R9 M290X retains a niche for legacy compute tasks.

Looking at the broader database averages, the picture is more nuanced. The R9 M290X has an average benchmark score of 23,276, while the RX 6650 XT sits at 19,765. That places the R9 M290X slightly ahead in aggregate, despite its age. The R9 M290X also holds a higher percentile rank among all GPUs at 68, compared to the RX 6650 XT's 65. When examining the nearest rivals, the R9 M290X is virtually tied with the AMD Radeon RX 6600M, which has an average score of 23,273 and a delta of 0%. It also edges out the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 and NVIDIA P106-100, both at 23,250 and 23,249 respectively, with a 0.1% delta. The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 is slightly ahead at 23,315, a negative 0.2% delta for the R9 M290X. The RX 6650 XT's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla K40m at 19,885, which is 0.6% ahead, and the AMD FirePro W7000 at 19,905, which leads by 0.7%. The RX 6650 XT does beat the AMD FirePro D300 and NVIDIA Quadro K5200, with deltas of 0.7% and 0.8% respectively.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins the Geekbench Metal test?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT wins decisively, scoring 97,969 compared to the R9 M290X's 24,524, a 75% margin in favor of the RX 6650 XT.

Q: Is the R9 M290X faster in any benchmark?

A: Yes, in Geekbench OpenCL, the R9 M290X scores 22,028 versus the RX 6650 XT's 10,111, giving the older card a 117.9% lead.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The R9 M290X has a higher average score of 23,276, while the RX 6650 XT averages 19,765, a difference of roughly 3,500 points in favor of the R9 M290X.

Q: What is the percentile ranking for each GPU?

A: The R9 M290X ranks in the 68th percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 6650 XT sits in the 65th percentile.

Q: Are the nearest rivals for each card similar in performance?

A: The R9 M290X is closely matched with the AMD Radeon RX 6600M, which shows a 0% delta, and the RX 6650 XT is near the NVIDIA Tesla K40m, which is 0.6% faster.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The RX 6650 XT boosts to 2635 MHz, while the R9 M290X boosts to only 900 MHz.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from entirely different architectural eras. The R9 M290X is built on GCN 1.0 with the Neptune chip, a 28 nm design from TSMC. It packs 2,800 million transistors on a 212 mm² die, which results in a transistor density of 13.2 million per square millimeter. The RX 6650 XT uses RDNA 2.0 with the Navi 23 chip, fabricated on a 7 nm process also by TSMC. This newer node allows for 11,060 million transistors on a slightly larger 237 mm² die, pushing density to 46.7 million per square millimeter. The density difference is stark, with the RX 6650 XT packing over three and a half times more transistors per area, enabling far more complex logic and higher clock speeds.

The R9 M290X has 1280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 raster operation units. It lacks dedicated ray tracing cores. The RX 6650 XT, in contrast, has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, plus 32 dedicated ray tracing cores. This hardware ray tracing capability is a major architectural leap, as the R9 M290X has no equivalent feature. The RX 6650 XT also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate with feature level 12_2, while the R9 M290X only reaches DirectX 12 with feature level 11_1. Both cards support OpenGL 4.6, but the RX 6650 XT has a newer Vulkan API version at 1.4, compared to 1.2.170 for the R9 M290X.

The memory subsystem also differs fundamentally. The R9 M290X uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 153.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 6650 XT uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, but with much faster memory clocks, it achieves 280.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 6650 XT's effective memory speed is 17.5 Gbps, while the R9 M290X operates at 4.8 Gbps. The newer card also supports PCIe 4.0 x8, whereas the R9 M290X is limited to PCIe 3.0 x16.

Specification Differences

The clock speeds show a massive generational gap. The R9 M290X has a base clock of 850 MHz and a boost of 900 MHz. The RX 6650 XT runs at a base of 2055 MHz, a boost of 2635 MHz, and has a game clock of 2410 MHz. Memory clocks differ similarly: the R9 M290X runs at 1200 MHz (4.8 Gbps effective), while the RX 6650 XT runs at 2190 MHz (17.5 Gbps effective).

Memory capacity and type differ: 4 GB GDDR5 versus 8 GB GDDR6. Bus width goes from 256-bit on the R9 M290X to 128-bit on the RX 6650 XT, but the newer card compensates with higher bandwidth. The R9 M290X has 1280 shaders, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, while the RX 6650 XT has 2048 shaders, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The RX 6650 XT also has 32 ray tracing cores, something the R9 M290X lacks entirely.

Pixel rate jumps from 28.80 GPixel/s on the R9 M290X to 168.6 GPixel/s on the RX 6650 XT. Texture rate goes from 72.00 GTexel/s to 337.3 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 2.304 TFLOPS for the R9 M290X versus 10.79 TFLOPS for the RX 6650 XT. The RX 6650 XT also has FP16 capability at 21.59 TFLOPS, while the R9 M290X lists no FP16 figure.

Power and physical specs differ as well. The R9 M290X has a 100 W TDP and uses an MXM module slot with no power connectors. The RX 6650 XT has a 176 W TDP, a dual-slot design, and requires a single 8-pin power connector, with a suggested PSU of 450 W. The R9 M290X's display outputs are portable device dependent, while the RX 6650 XT offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The R9 M290X was released on January 8, 2014, while the RX 6650 XT launched on May 9, 2022. The RX 6650 XT carries a launch MSRP of 399 USD.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split based on workload. For modern graphics APIs, particularly Metal and DirectX 12 Ultimate, the RX 6650 XT is the overwhelming choice. Its Metal score of 97,969 versus 24,524 shows a 75% lead, and its support for ray tracing and DirectX 12 Ultimate makes it suitable for current games and applications. The R9 M290X cannot compete in this domain, lacking both the raw performance and the feature set.

For legacy OpenCL compute, the R9 M290X is surprisingly dominant. Its OpenCL score of 22,028 more than doubles the RX 6650 XT's 10,111, a 117.9% margin. This indicates that the GCN architecture retains efficiency for certain compute tasks that the RDNA 2 architecture does not handle as well. The R9 M290X also has a higher average benchmark score of 23,276 versus 19,765, and a better percentile ranking at 68 versus 65. If the primary use case involves OpenCL workloads or older software optimized for GCN, the R9 M290X is the better performer.

The RX 6650 XT is the better all-around card for gaming and modern compute, given its higher clock speeds, more shaders, ray tracing hardware, and larger memory pool. The R9 M290X is a niche specialist, excelling in one specific API benchmark while lagging in everything else. The database shows that the RX 6650 XT is the logical upgrade path for most users, but the R9 M290X's OpenCL advantage should not be ignored by those running specific compute tasks.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6650 XT wins in Metal-based workloads, as shown by its 97,969 score versus 24,524 for the R9 M290X. This translates to better performance in macOS or Metal-accelerated applications, plus any modern game that uses Metal for rendering. Its 32 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support also give it a clear edge in ray-traced games and future titles that leverage DX12 Ultimate features. The higher memory bandwidth of 280.3 GB/s and 8 GB capacity also benefit high-resolution textures and larger datasets.

The R9 M290X wins in OpenCL compute, scoring 22,028 versus 10,111 for the RX 6650 XT. This makes it the better choice for applications that rely heavily on OpenCL, such as certain scientific simulations, video processing tools, or legacy software that was optimized for GCN-era hardware. Its lower TDP of 100 W also makes it easier to integrate into portable or space-constrained systems, given its MXM module form factor. The R9 M290X's higher average benchmark score and better percentile rank suggest that, in the aggregate, it holds up well against the RX 6650 XT for mixed workloads. Users with existing GCN-optimized pipelines may find the R9 M290X retains value, while those seeking modern features and raw speed should choose the RX 6650 XT.