AMD Radeon R9 M290X vs NVIDIA TITAN Xp Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a single direct comparison between these two graphics processors, and the result is emphatic. In the Geekbench OpenCL workload, the NVIDIA TITAN Xp records a score of 72,585, while the AMD Radeon R9 M290X manages 22,028. That puts the TITAN Xp ahead by 69.7 percent, a margin that dwarfs the scale of typical generational improvements and points to a fundamental gap in compute throughput.

Looking at raw specifications, the scale of the TITAN Xp's advantage becomes clearer. The NVIDIA part delivers 12.15 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is roughly 5.3 times the 2.304 TFLOPS of the AMD chip. The texture rate tells a similar story: the TITAN Xp reaches 379.7 GTexel/s versus 72.00 GTexel/s for the R9 M290X, a difference of more than 5x. Pixel rate is also lopsided, 151.9 GPixel/s versus 28.80 GPixel/s.

It is worth examining where the R9 M290X sits in the broader database context. Its average benchmark score of 23,276 places it in the 68th percentile of all GPUs tracked. The nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Radeon RX 6600M at 23,273 (a 0 percent delta), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 at 23,250 (0.1 percent ahead of the M290X), the NVIDIA P106-100 at 23,249 (0.1 percent ahead), and the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 at 23,315 (0.2 percent behind). So the M290X is clustered tightly with a group of mid-range parts, within a hair of each other in average scores.

The TITAN Xp, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 19,177, which puts it in the 64th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 at 19,164 (0.1 percent behind the TITAN Xp), the NVIDIA Tesla K20m at 19,089 (0.5 percent behind), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile at 19,049 (0.7 percent behind), and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 at 19,036 (0.7 percent behind). This is an interesting outcome: the TITAN Xp has a lower average score than the R9 M290X, yet it wins the only shared benchmark by a massive margin. The explanation likely lies in the composition of the benchmark suite. The TITAN Xp has a broad set of recorded tests, including PassMark DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12, plus 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, Geekbench Vulkan, and OpenCL. The R9 M290X only has two recorded benchmarks, both Geekbench (Metal and OpenCL). The averaging methodology across very different test sets can produce counterintuitive percentile rankings.

The OpenCL result itself deserves scrutiny. A 69.7 percent deficit for the AMD part is not merely a win; it is a rout. The R9 M290X's OpenCL score of 22,028 is actually close to its own Metal score of 24,524, suggesting the GPU performs consistently across different compute APIs. The TITAN Xp's Vulkan score of 87,180 and OpenCL score of 72,585 both indicate that NVIDIA's Pascal architecture scales much more aggressively in compute-heavy workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The R9 M290X wins in the narrow category of Metal API performance, where it posts 24,524, its highest recorded score. This is a mobile-oriented GPU, built on the GCN 1.0 architecture with a 28 nm process, and it appears well-suited to Apple's Metal framework, likely because of its presence in portable systems. For applications that rely on Metal, the M290X is the stronger part in this comparison.

The TITAN Xp wins in essentially every other measurable category. Beyond the OpenCL head-to-head, its Vulkan score of 87,180 is far above anything the AMD part could produce based on the available data. The PassMark suite shows a well-rounded profile: DirectX 9 at 226, DirectX 10 at 119, DirectX 11 at 152, DirectX 12 at 69, G2D at 883, G3D at 18,750, and GPU compute at 9,430. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result of 2,372 rounds out the picture. The R9 M290X has no recorded DirectX, Vulkan, or 3DMark scores in the database, so any comparison in those areas defaults to the TITAN Xp.

For compute-heavy tasks, the TITAN Xp is the clear choice. Its FP32 throughput of 12.15 TFLOPS versus 2.304 TFLOPS is a decisive advantage that shows up directly in the OpenCL benchmark. For gaming, the R9 M290X lacks any recorded DirectX results, while the TITAN Xp has measurable DirectX 11 and 12 performance, so the data favors NVIDIA there as well.

The R9 M290X does have one practical edge: power consumption. At 100 W TDP, it draws less than half of the TITAN Xp's 250 W. It also uses no external power connectors, while the TITAN Xp requires a 6-pin and an 8-pin connector plus a 600 W suggested PSU. For a portable device, the AMD part is the only realistic option given its MXM Module form factor.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the only direct benchmark comparison in the database?

A: The NVIDIA TITAN Xp wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 72,585 versus the AMD Radeon R9 M290X's 22,028, a 69.7 percent advantage.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon R9 M290X compare to its nearest rivals in average score?

A: The M290X has an average benchmark score of 23,276, which is within 0.2 percent of the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 (23,315), the AMD Radeon RX 6600M (23,273), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 (23,250), and the NVIDIA P106-100 (23,249).

Q: Does the NVIDIA TITAN Xp have a higher average benchmark score than the R9 M290X?

A: No. The TITAN Xp has an average score of 19,177, which is lower than the M290X's 23,276. However, the TITAN Xp's average is based on a much larger set of tests, including DirectX, Vulkan, and 3DMark workloads.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each GPU?

A: The R9 M290X has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth. The TITAN Xp has 12 GB of GDDR5X on a 384-bit bus with 547.6 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU supports the Vulkan API, and at what version?

A: The NVIDIA TITAN Xp supports Vulkan 1.4, while the AMD Radeon R9 M290X supports Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: What are the TDP requirements for each card?

A: The R9 M290X has a 100 W TDP with no external power connectors. The TITAN Xp has a 250 W TDP and requires a 6-pin plus 8-pin power connection with a 600 W suggested PSU.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category. The R9 M290X uses the Neptune chip with a 28 nm process, while the TITAN Xp uses the GP102 chip on a 16 nm process. Transistor counts diverge sharply: the TITAN Xp packs 11,800 million transistors versus 2,800 million for the AMD part. Die size also favors NVIDIA at 471 mm² versus 212 mm², and transistor density is 25.1M per mm² versus 13.2M per mm².

Clock speeds show the TITAN Xp running significantly higher. The NVIDIA GPU has a base clock of 1405 MHz and a boost of 1582 MHz, while the AMD part runs at 850 MHz base and 900 MHz boost. Memory clocks follow the same pattern: the TITAN Xp's memory runs at 1426 MHz with 11.4 Gbps effective, while the M290X's memory runs at 1200 MHz with 4.8 Gbps effective.

The compute unit counts are heavily skewed. The TITAN Xp has 3840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The R9 M290X has 1280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. These differences directly explain the pixel rate (151.9 vs 28.80 GPixel/s) and texture rate (379.7 vs 72.00 GTexel/s) gaps.

Memory capacity and type differ as well: 12 GB of GDDR5X for NVIDIA versus 4 GB of GDDR5 for AMD. Bus width is 384-bit versus 256-bit, and bandwidth is 547.6 GB/s versus 153.6 GB/s.

The physical and power profiles are also distinct. The TITAN Xp is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm in length, 112 mm in height, and 40 mm in width. The R9 M290X is an MXM Module, meaning it is designed for laptops and compact systems. The TITAN Xp requires a 600 W suggested PSU and uses 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connectors; the M290X needs no external power. Display outputs differ too: the TITAN Xp has 1x HDMI 2.0 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the M290X's outputs are portable device dependent.

The API support also differs. The TITAN Xp supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The R9 M290X supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is generational. The R9 M290X is built on GCN 1.0, AMD's first-generation Graphics Core Next design, and belongs to the Gem System (R9 M200) generation. Its predecessor is the Solar System and its successor is Polaris Mobile. The TITAN Xp uses NVIDIA's Pascal architecture, belongs to the GeForce 10 generation, follows the GeForce 900 series, and precedes the GeForce 20 series.

The process node disparity is significant: 28 nm for AMD versus 16 nm for NVIDIA, both fabricated by TSMC. The smaller node allows the TITAN Xp to pack over 4x the transistors into a die that is only about 2.2x larger, resulting in nearly double the transistor density (25.1M versus 13.2M per mm²).

The R9 M290X has no dedicated ray tracing cores or tensor cores, and neither does the TITAN Xp. Both rely on traditional shader-based rendering. The AMD part's FP16 capability is not recorded in the database, while the TITAN Xp shows 189.8 GFLOPS at a 1:64 ratio, indicating that half-precision compute is heavily downclocked or emulated rather than a native strength.

The R9 M290X was released in January 2014, while the TITAN Xp arrived in April 2017, a gap of over three years. Both are now end-of-life products, but they represent very different design philosophies: the M290X is a mobile-first part optimized for low power (100 W) and compact integration, while the TITAN Xp is a desktop flagship built for maximum throughput (250 W) with no concession to portability.

The Verdict

The data presents a straightforward conclusion for raw performance: the NVIDIA TITAN Xp is in a different class. The OpenCL head-to-head shows a 69.7 percent deficit for the R9 M290X, and the specification sheet reinforces that gap across every compute metric. Anyone needing maximum FP32 throughput, high memory bandwidth, or large VRAM capacity should choose the TITAN Xp. Its 12.15 TFLOPS, 547.6 GB/s bandwidth, and 12 GB of GDDR5X are simply not approachable by the AMD part.

However, the R9 M290X is not without a purpose. Its 100 W TDP and MXM form factor make it the only viable option in this comparison for portable or space-constrained systems. The TITAN Xp, at 267 mm long and requiring a 600 W PSU, cannot fit in such environments. For Metal-based workloads, the M290X's 24,524 score is its strongest recorded result and suggests reasonable performance in Apple-centric ecosystems.

The percentile rankings complicate the picture. The R9 M290X sits at the 68th percentile of all GPUs, while the TITAN Xp sits at the 64th percentile. This is driven by the different benchmark sets each card has been subjected to. The TITAN Xp's average of 19,177 is dragged down by its PassMark DirectX scores, which are numerically small (ranging from 69 to 226). These are likely measured on a different scale than the Geekbench results, and including them in an arithmetic average pulls the TITAN Xp down despite its dominant OpenCL and Vulkan numbers.

For a user who primarily runs compute workloads that leverage OpenCL or Vulkan, the TITAN Xp is the clear pick. Its Vulkan score of 87,180 is the highest recorded score for either card on any test, and its OpenCL result of 72,585 is more than 3x the AMD part's score. For a user constrained by power, size, or platform compatibility (particularly portable devices), the R9 M290X is the sensible choice, accepting a substantial performance penalty in exchange for a 100 W envelope and no external power requirement.

The database does not include gaming-specific benchmarks for the R9 M290X, so any DirectX-based gaming comparison defaults to the TITAN Xp's recorded results, which include a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,372 and PassMark DirectX 11 and 12 scores of 152 and 69 respectively. The TITAN Xp also carries a launch MSRP of 1,199 USD, a detail that positions it as a premium product. Neither card is in production, and both have successors and predecessors listed, so the choice here is purely about matching the remaining hardware to the workload.