AMD Radeon R9 M290X vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Comparison

The AMD Radeon R9 M290X and NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 represent two vastly different eras of mobile graphics, separated by nearly five years of architectural evolution. The data shows a single head-to-head benchmark result, and it is a decisive one: the Quadro RTX 5000 wins the only common test, Geekbench OpenCL, with a score of 78,999 against the R9 M290X’s 22,028. That is a delta of -72.1% for the AMD part, meaning the NVIDIA GPU delivers roughly 3.6 times the raw compute throughput in that workload. While the R9 M290X holds a percentile rank of 68 against all GPUs, the Quadro RTX 5000 sits at 67, indicating that despite the massive generational gap in absolute performance, both cards occupy similar positions relative to their respective contemporary GPU landscapes.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole direct benchmark comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL, where the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 scores 78,999 compared to the AMD Radeon R9 M290X’s 22,028. The deltaPct of -72.1% quantifies the scale of the defeat for the older AMD card. This is not a marginal difference; it is a categorical leap in compute performance. The Quadro RTX 5000’s result is more than triple that of the R9 M290X, a reflection of its far larger silicon and modern architecture. In this specific test, the NVIDIA card is the clear winner, and the data offers no counterbalancing victory for the AMD part. The R9 M290X does not have any benchmark wins in the head-to-head comparison; winsA is 0, while winsB is 1.

Looking beyond the direct comparison, the average benchmark scores tell a slightly different story. The R9 M290X has an average benchmark score of 23,276, while the Quadro RTX 5000 averages 21,629. This inversion occurs because the average includes a broader set of workloads, including older DirectX tests where the newer architecture may not scale as favorably. The Quadro RTX 5000’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB, which scores 21,856 with a deltaPct of -1%, and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile at 21,379 with a deltaPct of 1.2%. The R9 M290X’s closest competitors are the AMD Radeon RX 6600M at 23,273 (deltaPct 0%) and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 at 23,250 (deltaPct 0.1%). This shows that in aggregate, the older AMD card still performs competitively against mid-range parts from much later generations, even if it cannot match the peak compute of the workstation-class NVIDIA GPU.

The Geekbench OpenCL score of the Quadro RTX 5000 is further contextualized by its Vulkan result of 92,309, which is even higher. The R9 M290X has no Vulkan benchmark score in the data, only Geekbench Metal at 24,524 and Geekbench OpenCL at 22,028. The Quadro RTX 5000’s Passmark results are notably mixed, with a G3D score of 15,616 and a GPU compute score of 6,525, but also low DirectX scores such as 59 in DirectX 12 and 113 in DirectX 10. These low DirectX scores likely reflect driver optimization for professional workloads rather than gaming, but they do show that the Quadro RTX 5000 is not uniformly superior across all test types.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two GPUs is vast. The AMD Radeon R9 M290X is built on the GCN 1.0 architecture using a 28 nm process at TSMC, with a chip codenamed Neptune. It packs 2,800 million transistors on a 212 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.2M per mm². In contrast, the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 uses the Turing architecture on a 12 nm process, also at TSMC, with the TU104 chip containing 13,600 million transistors across a 545 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 25.0M per mm². This represents nearly a fivefold increase in raw transistor count and roughly double the density, enabling far more complex compute units.

The compute configuration differs dramatically. The R9 M290X has 1,280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The Quadro RTX 5000 has 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, more than doubling the AMD part in every category. Critically, the NVIDIA card introduces dedicated hardware that the AMD card lacks entirely: 48 RT cores and 384 tensor cores. These are purpose-built for ray tracing and AI acceleration, respectively, and their absence in the R9 M290X explains why the older card cannot compete in modern professional workloads. The Quadro RTX 5000 also supports FP16 compute at 22.30 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the R9 M290X has no listed FP16 performance, further underscoring the compute capability gap.

Memory architecture is another major differentiator. The R9 M290X uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 153.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro RTX 5000 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on the same 256-bit bus width, but achieves 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth, a nearly threefold increase. The clock speeds also diverge: the AMD card runs at a base of 850 MHz and boost of 900 MHz, while the NVIDIA card runs at 1,620 MHz base and 1,815 MHz boost. Even the memory clock differs, with the R9 M290X at 1,200 MHz (4.8 Gbps effective) versus the Quadro RTX 5000 at 1,750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). These are not incremental improvements; they are generational leaps.

The API support also reflects the age gap. The R9 M290X supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Quadro RTX 5000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The newer DirectX 12 Ultimate feature set includes hardware ray tracing and mesh shaders, which are enabled by the RT cores. The power consumption difference is substantial as well: the R9 M290X has a TDP of 100 W, while the Quadro RTX 5000 draws 230 W, a reflection of its much larger die and higher clock speeds. The physical form factors differ too, with the AMD card using an MXM module and the NVIDIA card being a dual-slot design measuring 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height, requiring one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector. The Quadro RTX 5000 also lists a suggested power supply of 550 W, whereas the R9 M290X lists no suggested PSU.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous for raw compute performance: the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 is in a different league from the AMD Radeon R9 M290X. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 78,999 versus 22,028, a delta of -72.1%, means the NVIDIA card offers more than three times the throughput. For any workload that relies on OpenCL compute, FP32 performance, or the dedicated RT and tensor cores, the Quadro RTX 5000 is the only sensible choice. Its 11.15 TFLOPS of FP32 performance dwarfs the R9 M290X’s 2.304 TFLOPS, and its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth provides ample headroom for large datasets. The RTX 5000 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, future-proofing it for modern APIs.

However, the average benchmark score tells a more nuanced story. The R9 M290X averages 23,276, which is actually higher than the Quadro RTX 5000’s 21,629. This is because the average includes a broader set of legacy tests, such as Passmark DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12, where the NVIDIA card scores poorly (195, 113, 140, and 59, respectively). The R9 M290X’s percentile rank of 68 versus the Quadro RTX 5000’s 67 also indicates that, relative to all GPUs, the AMD card is marginally better positioned in the overall performance distribution. This suggests that for older DirectX-based applications or workloads that do not leverage modern compute features, the R9 M290X may still hold its own, despite being from 2014.

The verdict depends on the intended use case. If the priority is modern compute, ray tracing, AI acceleration, or professional CAD and rendering workloads, the Quadro RTX 5000 is the clear winner. Its RT cores and tensor cores are non-negotiable for contemporary tasks. If the use case is legacy DirectX gaming or basic graphics output where power consumption matters, the R9 M290X’s 100 W TDP is far more efficient than the 230 W TDP of the Quadro RTX 5000. The R9 M290X also has a higher average benchmark score, which may appeal to users running a mix of older applications. Yet, the sheer compute advantage of the Quadro RTX 5000, combined with its 16 GB memory capacity, makes it the superior choice for anyone who needs performance today rather than in 2014.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every specification. The process node is 28 nm for the AMD card versus 12 nm for the NVIDIA card. Transistor count is 2,800 million versus 13,600 million, and die size is 212 mm² versus 545 mm². Transistor density is 13.2M per mm² versus 25.0M per mm². Base clock is 850 MHz versus 1,620 MHz, boost clock is 900 MHz versus 1,815 MHz, and memory clock is 1,200 MHz (4.8 Gbps effective) versus 1,750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). Memory size is 4 GB GDDR5 versus 16 GB GDDR6, with bandwidth at 153.6 GB/s versus 448.0 GB/s. Shading units are 1,280 versus 3,072, TMUs are 80 versus 192, and ROPs are 32 versus 64. The NVIDIA card has 48 RT cores and 384 tensor cores, which the AMD card lacks entirely. Pixel rate is 28.80 GPixel/s versus 116.2 GPixel/s, texture rate is 72.00 GTexel/s versus 348.5 GTexel/s, and FP32 is 2.304 TFLOPS versus 11.15 TFLOPS. The AMD card has no FP16 data, while the NVIDIA card has 22.30 TFLOPS (2:1). TDP is 100 W versus 230 W. Slot width is MXM Module versus Dual-slot, and power connectors are None versus 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin. The suggested PSU is not listed for AMD but is 550 W for NVIDIA. Display outputs are Portable Device Dependent for AMD versus 4x DisplayPort 1.4a and 1x USB Type-C for NVIDIA. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16 for both. DirectX support is 12 (11_1) versus 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL is 4.6 for both, and Vulkan is 1.2.170 versus 1.4. The NVIDIA card has dimensions of 267 mm length and 111 mm height, while the AMD card has no listed dimensions.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 scores 78,999, while the AMD Radeon R9 M290X scores 22,028, a delta of -72.1% for the AMD part.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon R9 M290X have any benchmark wins against the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows winsA as 0 and winsB as 1; the NVIDIA card wins the only common benchmark.

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

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M290X has an average benchmark score of 23,276, while the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 has an average of 21,629.

Q: How much memory does each card have, and what type?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M290X has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory.

Q: What are the FP32 performance figures for both GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M290X delivers 2.304 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, whereas the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 delivers 11.15 TFLOPS.

Q: Which GPU has dedicated RT cores and tensor cores?

A: Only the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 has them, with 48 RT cores and 384 tensor cores; the AMD Radeon R9 M290X has none.