AMD Radeon R9 M290X vs NVIDIA RTX A4000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single directly comparable benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is not close. The NVIDIA RTX A4000 scores 105,739 points, while the AMD Radeon R9 M290X manages 22,028 points. That is a 380% delta in favor of the RTX A4000. In practical terms, the RTX A4000 delivers roughly 4.8 times the raw OpenCL compute throughput of the older AMD part. This is a generational chasm, not a competitive race.

Looking at the broader database context, the RTX A4000 sits at the 72nd percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 26,683. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary (average score 26,553, delta 0.5%), the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 (26,421, delta 1%), the AMD Radeon 860M (26,401, delta 1.1%), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 (26,331, delta 1.3%). The RTX A4000 is essentially neck-and-neck with these modern parts, edging them out by fractions of a percent. That places it in the upper tier of contemporary graphics hardware.

The R9 M290X, by contrast, sits at the 68th percentile with an average benchmark score of 23,276. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 6600M (23,273, delta 0%), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 (23,250, delta 0.1%), the NVIDIA P106-100 (23,249, delta 0.1%), and the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 (23,315, delta -0.2%). The R9 M290X is statistically tied with these cards, none of which are modern flagship parts. The percentile gap between the two cards is modest (72 vs 68), but the OpenCL score gap is enormous, which suggests the average score is dragged down by the R9 M290X's limited test coverage.

The database records one win for the RTX A4000 and zero for the R9 M290X in head-to-head tests. There is no benchmark in the shared suite where the AMD card comes out ahead. The only overlap is Geekbench OpenCL, and the RTX A4000 wins that by a landslide.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A4000 wins in every measurable category where both cards have data. Its OpenCL score is 380% higher, which reflects a fundamentally different level of compute capability. The RTX A4000 also has a much richer benchmark profile: it has been tested across 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 (2,604 points), Geekbench Vulkan (127,645), Passmark DirectX 10 (126), DirectX 11 (158), DirectX 12 (72), DirectX 9 (240), G2D (1,024), G3D (19,459), and GPU Compute (9,760). The R9 M290X has only two recorded benchmarks: Geekbench Metal (24,524) and Geekbench OpenCL (22,028).

The R9 M290X does have a winning angle, but it is not performance. It is a mobile-oriented MXM module with no power connectors and a 100 W TDP, compared to the RTX A4000's single-slot 140 W design with a 6-pin connector. For a system that needs a low-profile, self-contained GPU in a laptop or compact chassis, the R9 M290X has a physical footprint advantage. But the database shows no benchmark where it outperforms the RTX A4000. In every shared test, the NVIDIA card is faster, often by an order of magnitude.

The RTX A4000 also wins on API support. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the R9 M290X is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. That means the RTX A4000 can handle modern ray tracing and mesh shader workloads, while the R9 M290X is stuck with older feature levels. For any current-generation game or compute task, the RTX A4000 is the only sensible choice.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the RTX A4000 in OpenCL compared to the R9 M290X?

A: The RTX A4000 scores 105,739 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the R9 M290X scores 22,028. That is a 380% delta, meaning the RTX A4000 is roughly 4.8 times faster in this test.

Q: Does the R9 M290X win any benchmark against the RTX A4000?

A: No. The database records 1 win for the RTX A4000 and 0 wins for the R9 M290X. The only shared benchmark is Geekbench OpenCL, and the RTX A4000 wins that decisively.

Q: How do these cards compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The RTX A4000 has an average score of 26,683, placing it 0.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary and 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060. The R9 M290X has an average score of 23,276, which is statistically tied with the AMD Radeon RX 6600M (0% delta) and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 (0.1% delta).

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The RTX A4000 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth. The R9 M290X has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX A4000 has nearly three times the memory bandwidth and four times the capacity.

Q: Which card supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The RTX A4000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4. The R9 M290X supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. The RTX A4000 also has 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores, which the R9 M290X lacks entirely.

Q: What is the TDP and power requirement for each card?

A: The RTX A4000 has a 140 W TDP with a single 6-pin power connector and a suggested PSU of 300 W. The R9 M290X has a 100 W TDP with no power connectors, as it is an MXM module designed for portable devices.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every specification that matters. The RTX A4000 uses a GA104 chip on an 8 nm Samsung process, with 17,400 million transistors on a 392 mm² die. The R9 M290X uses a Neptune chip on a 28 nm TSMC process, with 2,800 million transistors on a 212 mm² die. Transistor density is 44.4 million per mm² for the RTX A4000 versus 13.2 million per mm² for the R9 M290X.

Clock speeds: the RTX A4000 has a base clock of 735 MHz and a boost clock of 1,560 MHz, with memory running at 1,750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The R9 M290X has a base clock of 850 MHz and a boost clock of 900 MHz, with memory at 1,200 MHz (4.8 Gbps effective). The RTX A4000 has a lower base clock but a much higher boost, and significantly faster memory.

Compute resources: the RTX A4000 has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The R9 M290X has 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RTX A4000 also has 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores, neither of which exist on the R9 M290X. Pixel rate is 149.8 GPixel/s for the RTX A4000 versus 28.80 GPixel/s for the R9 M290X. Texture rate is 299.5 GTexel/s versus 72.00 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 19.17 TFLOPS versus 2.304 TFLOPS. The RTX A4000 also supports FP16 at 19.17 TFLOPS (1:1), while the R9 M290X has no recorded FP16 capability.

Physical and interface differences: the RTX A4000 is a single-slot card, 241 mm long (9.5 inches) and 112 mm high (4.4 inches), with a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface and 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The R9 M290X is an MXM module with no length, height, or width recorded, using PCIe 3.0 x16 and portable-device-dependent display outputs.

Architecture Differences

The RTX A4000 is built on NVIDIA's Ampere architecture, which is a workstation-generation design (Workstation Ampere, Ax000 series). It uses an 8 nm Samsung process and includes dedicated RT cores for ray tracing and tensor cores for AI workloads. The GA104 chip is a modern, feature-rich design with support for DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4. It has 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores, making it suitable for ray-traced rendering and machine learning inference. The FP16 throughput is identical to FP32 at 19.17 TFLOPS, indicating a 1:1 ratio that is useful for mixed-precision workloads.

The R9 M290X is built on AMD's GCN 1.0 architecture, which is a first-generation Graphics Core Next design. It is part of the Gem System (R9 M200) generation and uses a 28 nm TSMC process. There are no RT cores or tensor cores, no ray tracing acceleration, and no tensor operations. The FP32 throughput is 2.304 TFLOPS, and there is no recorded FP16 capability. The R9 M290X supports DirectX 12 (11_1), which is a feature-level 11_1 implementation, not full DirectX 12 Ultimate. Vulkan support is 1.2.170, which is older than the RTX A4000's Vulkan 1.4.

The transistor count difference is stark: 17,400 million for the RTX A4000 versus 2,800 million for the R9 M290X. That is a 6.2x difference in transistor count, enabled by the newer 8 nm process. The die size is also larger for the RTX A4000 (392 mm² versus 212 mm²), but the density is much higher (44.4M/mm² versus 13.2M/mm²). The R9 M290X is a mobile-oriented part from 2014, while the RTX A4000 is a workstation card from 2021, and the architecture gap reflects seven years of GPU development.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear choice for nearly every use case. The RTX A4000 is 380% faster in OpenCL, has 16 GB of memory versus 4 GB, supports modern APIs including DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, and includes dedicated RT and tensor cores. It has a 72nd percentile ranking versus the R9 M290X's 68th, and its average benchmark score of 26,683 is higher than the R9 M290X's 23,276. There is no recorded benchmark where the R9 M290X wins.

The only scenario where the R9 M290X makes sense is a legacy mobile system that requires an MXM module with no external power connectors and a 100 W TDP. If the chassis is physically locked to that form factor, the R9 M290X is the only option that fits. But for any desktop workstation, any modern laptop with a standard GPU slot, or any workload involving ray tracing, tensor math, or high-resolution textures, the RTX A4000 is the definitive choice.

The RTX A4000's nearest rivals are all modern cards: the RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary, the MX550, the Radeon 860M, and the RTX 5060. It trades blows with all of them within a 1.3% margin. The R9 M290X's nearest rivals are similarly modern parts like the RX 6600M and the Pro Vega 16, but it is tied with them, not ahead. The RTX A4000 is a competitive modern GPU. The R9 M290X is an obsolete mobile part that happens to share a percentile range.

For a builder choosing between these two today, the RTX A4000 wins on every performance metric recorded. The R9 M290X is only relevant for hardware preservation or a very specific MXM-only laptop. Otherwise, the RTX A4000 is the only rational pick from the database's perspective.