AMD Radeon R9 M290X vs NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon R9 M290X compare to the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile in raw compute performance?

A: The RTX A4000 Mobile delivers 17.20 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the R9 M290X provides 2.304 TFLOPS. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA scores 97,178 versus 22,028 for the AMD, a delta of -77.3% for the older card.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density, and what does that indicate?

A: The RTX A4000 Mobile has a transistor density of 44.4M / mm², compared to 13.2M / mm² for the R9 M290X. This reflects the NVIDIA chip’s more modern 8 nm process versus AMD’s 28 nm node, allowing far more transistors (17,400 million vs 2,800 million) in a larger die (392 mm² vs 212 mm²).

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The R9 M290X has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX A4000 Mobile has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 384.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA card also runs its memory at 12 Gbps effective, versus 4.8 Gbps for the AMD.

Q: Which GPU supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The RTX A4000 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the R9 M290X supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both cards support OpenGL 4.6.

Q: How many shading units and texture mapping units does each GPU have?

A: The R9 M290X has 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RTX A4000 Mobile has 5,120 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 80 ROPs, along with 40 RT cores and 160 tensor cores.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores and percentile rankings?

A: The R9 M290X has an average benchmark score of 23,276 and sits in the 68th percentile of all GPUs. The RTX A4000 Mobile averages 21,379 and sits in the 66th percentile. Despite the NVIDIA’s higher peak scores, its average is pulled down by lower scores in some tests.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon R9 M290X is built on GCN 1.0 architecture with the Neptune chip, fabricated on TSMC’s 28 nm process. The NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile uses Ampere architecture with the GA104 chip, fabricated on Samsung’s 8 nm process. This process difference is stark: the AMD chip contains 2,800 million transistors on a 212 mm² die, while the NVIDIA chip packs 17,400 million transistors into 392 mm². The resulting transistor density is 13.2M / mm² for AMD versus 44.4M / mm² for NVIDIA.

The shading unit count illustrates the scale gap. The R9 M290X has 1,280 shaders, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RTX A4000 Mobile has 5,120 shaders, 160 TMUs, and 80 ROPs — exactly four times the shader count and double the TMUs and ROPs. Additionally, the NVIDIA card includes dedicated hardware absent from the AMD chip: 40 RT cores for ray tracing and 160 tensor cores for AI workloads.

Clock speeds also differ significantly. The R9 M290X runs at 850 MHz base and 900 MHz boost. The RTX A4000 Mobile runs at 1,140 MHz base and 1,680 MHz boost. Memory clocks are even more divergent: the AMD card uses 1,200 MHz (4.8 Gbps effective) GDDR5, while the NVIDIA uses 1,500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) GDDR6. The NVIDIA card also supports FP16 at 17.20 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), whereas the AMD card has no listed FP16 capability.

The bus interface reflects generational progress: the R9 M290X uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the RTX A4000 Mobile uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Both cards are end-of-life, with the AMD releasing in January 2014 and the NVIDIA in April 2021. The AMD is part of the Gem System (R9 M200) generation, while the NVIDIA belongs to the Ampere-MW (Ax000) generation. The AMD’s predecessor is Solar System and its successor is Polaris Mobile; the NVIDIA’s predecessor is Quadro Turing-M and its successor is Ada-MW.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark available is Geekbench OpenCL. The RTX A4000 Mobile scores 97,178, while the R9 M290X scores 22,028. This gives the NVIDIA card a delta of -77.3% from the AMD’s perspective, meaning the AMD performs roughly 77% worse in this test. The NVIDIA card is 4.4 times faster in raw OpenCL compute.

This single data point is decisive in compute-heavy workloads. The RTX A4000 Mobile’s shading unit advantage (5,120 vs 1,280) and higher boost clock (1,680 MHz vs 900 MHz) combine to produce this massive gap. The AMD card’s pixel rate of 28.80 GPixel/s and texture rate of 72.00 GTexel/s are dwarfed by the NVIDIA’s 134.4 GPixel/s and 268.8 GTexel/s.

However, the overall benchmark picture is more nuanced. The AMD R9 M290X has an average benchmark score of 23,276 across all tests, while the RTX A4000 Mobile averages 21,379. The AMD sits in the 68th percentile versus the NVIDIA’s 66th. This suggests that while the NVIDIA wins decisively in OpenCL, the AMD performs better in other unspecified benchmarks that contribute to its higher average.

The nearest rivals for each card clarify their positioning. The R9 M290X is closest to the AMD Radeon RX 6600M (23,273 average, 0% delta), AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 (23,250, 0.1% delta), NVIDIA P106-100 (23,249, 0.1% delta), and AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 (23,315, -0.2% delta). The RTX A4000 Mobile is closest to the AMD Radeon HD 8970M (21,237, 0.7% delta), AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (21,153, 1.1% delta), NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 (21,629, -1.2% delta), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 (21,035, 1.6% delta).

The Verdict

The data clearly shows that the RTX A4000 Mobile is the superior GPU for compute-intensive tasks. Its 17.20 TFLOPS FP32 performance, 384.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 5,120 shading units place it in a different class than the R9 M290X. The OpenCL benchmark result of 97,178 versus 22,028 leaves no ambiguity: the NVIDIA card is over four times faster in that workload.

However, the average benchmark scores tell a different story. The R9 M290X averages 23,276 and ranks in the 68th percentile, while the RTX A4000 Mobile averages 21,379 and ranks in the 66th percentile. This means that in the broader set of benchmarks contributing to these averages, the AMD card actually performs slightly better. The NVIDIA card’s higher peak performance is offset by weaker showings in other tests, particularly its low PassMark scores in DirectX 10 (105), DirectX 11 (127), DirectX 12 (66), and DirectX 9 (157).

For users prioritizing raw compute or modern features like ray tracing (40 RT cores) and tensor cores (160), the RTX A4000 Mobile is the obvious choice. For users running legacy workloads or games that favor the GCN architecture, the R9 M290X may deliver more consistent results, as its percentile ranking suggests. The NVIDIA card’s average is dragged down by its PassMark DirectX results, which are anomalously low compared to its Geekbench scores.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every specification category. Process node: 28 nm (AMD) versus 8 nm (NVIDIA). Transistors: 2,800 million versus 17,400 million. Die size: 212 mm² versus 392 mm². Transistor density: 13.2M / mm² versus 44.4M / mm².

Clock speeds: 850 MHz base / 900 MHz boost (AMD) versus 1,140 MHz base / 1,680 MHz boost (NVIDIA). Memory: 4 GB GDDR5 (AMD) versus 8 GB GDDR6 (NVIDIA), both on 256-bit buses. Memory bandwidth: 153.6 GB/s versus 384.0 GB/s. Memory clock: 1200 MHz / 4.8 Gbps effective versus 1500 MHz / 12 Gbps effective.

Compute units: 1,280 shaders / 80 TMUs / 32 ROPs (AMD) versus 5,120 shaders / 160 TMUs / 80 ROPs (NVIDIA). The NVIDIA adds 40 RT cores and 160 tensor cores, which the AMD lacks. Pixel rate: 28.80 GPixel/s versus 134.4 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 72.00 GTexel/s versus 268.8 GTexel/s. FP32: 2.304 TFLOPS versus 17.20 TFLOPS. FP16: not listed for AMD versus 17.20 TFLOPS (1:1) for NVIDIA.

Power draw: 100 W (AMD) versus 115 W (NVIDIA). Both use no power connectors and have portable-device-dependent display outputs. Bus interface: PCIe 3.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x16. DirectX support: 12 (11_1) versus 12 Ultimate (12_2). Vulkan: 1.2.170 versus 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 for both. The AMD uses an MXM Module slot width; the NVIDIA has no listed slot width.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A4000 Mobile wins decisively in compute-heavy workloads. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 97,178 is 4.4 times the R9 M290X’s 22,028. This makes it the clear choice for tasks like GPU-accelerated rendering, scientific simulation, or machine learning inference, especially given its 160 tensor cores and 40 RT cores. Its 384.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 17.20 TFLOPS FP32 performance support this positioning.

The R9 M290X wins in consistency across diverse benchmarks. Its average score of 23,276 exceeds the NVIDIA’s 21,379, and its 68th percentile ranking beats the NVIDIA’s 66th. This suggests that for applications that are not purely compute-bound — such as older DirectX 9, 10, or 11 games — the AMD card may offer more stable performance. Its lower power draw (100 W versus 115 W) also makes it a more efficient option for thin-and-light mobile systems.

The RTX A4000 Mobile’s PassMark scores reveal its weakness: DirectX 10 (105), DirectX 11 (127), DirectX 12 (66), and DirectX 9 (157) are all very low. Its PassMark G3D score of 14,796 and GPU compute score of 6,394 are more respectable, but the DirectX results drag its average down. The R9 M290X does not have PassMark scores listed, but its higher average benchmark score suggests it performs better in these legacy API workloads.

For modern workloads using Vulkan 1.4 or DirectX 12 Ultimate, the RTX A4000 Mobile is the only option that supports these APIs. For users with older software locked to DirectX 11 or earlier, the R9 M290X’s higher percentile ranking may translate to better real-world results. The NVIDIA card’s nearest rival, the Quadro RTX 5000 (21,629 average), is actually slower in average terms, while the AMD’s nearest rival, the RX 6600M (23,273 average), is nearly identical in performance.