AMD Radeon RX 590 vs AMD Radeon RX 7800M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data includes a single direct comparison between these two GPUs, and it is a decisive one. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the AMD Radeon RX 7800M scores 2994, while the AMD Radeon RX 590 scores 1081. This yields a delta of 177% in favor of the RX 7800M. That is not a marginal improvement; it is a near-tripling of the raw score. The RX 7800M does not just beat the RX 590, it leaves it in a different performance class entirely for this modern DirectX 12 workload.

The broader benchmark averages reinforce this gap, though the difference narrows when considering a wider range of tests. The RX 7800M holds an average benchmark score of 27883 across its recorded tests, placing it at the 73rd percentile of all GPUs in the database. The RX 590, with an average of 24744, sits at the 70th percentile. The percentage gap between their averages is roughly 12.7%, which is substantial but far less dramatic than the 177% seen in the Steel Nomad test. This suggests that the RX 7800M's advantage is most pronounced in the newest, most demanding API workloads, while older or lighter tests may compress the difference.

Looking at the nearest rivals for context, the RX 7800M sits within 0.8% of the AMD FirePro S7150 and within 0.5% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti, according to the database's average score comparisons. The RX 590, meanwhile, is nearly tied with the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile (0.1% behind) and is 1.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT. These rival groupings show that the RX 7800M is competing in a higher tier of overall performance, even if its average is not as far ahead as the single head-to-head test implies.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two is generational and profound. The RX 7800M is built on the Navi 32 chip using RDNA 3.0 architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The RX 590 uses the Polaris 30 chip with GCN 4.0 architecture, on a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries. That process difference alone explains much of the efficiency and density gap: the RX 7800M packs 28,100 million transistors into a 346 mm² die, yielding a density of 81.2 million transistors per square millimeter. The RX 590 has 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, for a density of just 24.6 million per square millimeter. The newer chip crams nearly five times as many transistors into a die that is only about 49% larger.

The memory subsystem tells a similar story. The RX 7800M comes with 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 590 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, which yields 256.0 GB/s. Despite the narrower bus, the RX 7800M achieves 68.8% more bandwidth thanks to faster memory clocks (2250 MHz or 18 Gbps effective versus 2000 MHz or 8 Gbps effective). The RX 7800M also supports PCIe 4.0 x16, while the RX 590 is limited to PCIe 3.0 x16.

Compute resources scale accordingly. The RX 7800M has 3840 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 96 render output units. The RX 590 has 2304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and only 32 ROPs. The ROP count difference is particularly stark: the RX 7800M has three times the pixel output capability, which shows in the pixel rate of 224.2 GPixel/s versus 49.44 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 560.4 GTexel/s versus 222.5 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance (FP32) is 35.87 TFLOPS versus 7.119 TFLOPS, a fivefold difference. The RX 7800M also introduces 60 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the RX 590, which has no RT cores listed.

API support differs as well. The RX 7800M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the RX 590 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0). Vulkan support is 1.4 on the new card versus 1.3 on the old one. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7800M wins in every scenario where modern API features matter. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate support, ray tracing cores, and vastly higher memory bandwidth make it the clear choice for current AAA titles, especially those using ray tracing or demanding high-resolution textures. The 177% lead in 3DMark Steel Nomad, which is a modern DX12 benchmark, indicates that this advantage is not theoretical. It is measurable in the most relevant workload for today's games.

The RX 590, on the other hand, has no benchmark wins in the head-to-head data. It does have one advantage in the database that is structural rather than performance-based: its form factor and power delivery are designed for a traditional desktop slot. The RX 590 is a dual-slot card with a 1x 8-pin power connector and a suggested PSU of 450 W. The RX 7800M is listed as an IGP (integrated graphics package) with no power connectors and a TDP of 180 W, compared to the RX 590's 175 W. This suggests the RX 7800M is intended for mobile or compact systems where the GPU is soldered or embedded, not for user-upgradable desktop slots.

For legacy workloads, the RX 590's GCN architecture may still function, but the data does not show any test where it outperforms the RX 7800M. The RX 590's release date of 2018 and its end-of-life production status indicate it is a product from a previous era, while the RX 7800M was released in 2024 and remains active. The RX 590's successor is listed as Vega, and its predecessor is Arctic Islands, positioning it as a middle child in a long-gone lineup.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7800M has an average benchmark score of 27883, compared to the AMD Radeon RX 590's 24744. This places the RX 7800M at the 73rd percentile of all GPUs and the RX 590 at the 70th percentile.

Q: How much faster is the RX 7800M in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test?

A: The RX 7800M scores 2994, while the RX 590 scores 1081, giving the RX 7800M a 177% higher score in that specific test.

Q: Does the RX 590 support ray tracing?

A: No. The RX 590 has no ray tracing cores listed in the database. The RX 7800M includes 60 ray tracing cores.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The RX 7800M has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 590 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Are these cards in the same production category?

A: No. The RX 7800M has a production status of "Active," while the RX 590 is listed as "End-of-life."

Q: Which card has a higher transistor count?

A: The RX 7800M has 28,100 million transistors, versus 5,700 million for the RX 590. The RX 7800M also uses a smaller 5 nm process, compared to the RX 590's 12 nm process.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear and unambiguous conclusion: the AMD Radeon RX 7800M is the superior performer in every measurable category recorded. Its 177% advantage in the Steel Nomad DX12 test, its higher average score, its larger memory pool, and its support for modern APIs and ray tracing all indicate that it is the correct choice for anyone seeking current-generation performance. The RX 590 cannot compete on raw numbers, and it lacks the architectural features required for modern game development.

However, the RX 7800M is an IGP with no power connectors, which means it is not a drop-in replacement for a desktop GPU. It is designed for integrated or mobile systems. The RX 590, despite being end-of-life, offers a traditional dual-slot form factor with a standard 8-pin connector and a 450 W PSU suggestion, making it easier to install in a legacy desktop. For someone with an older system that cannot accommodate an integrated mobile-class part, the RX 590 remains a functional option, but the performance trade-off is massive. The RX 7800M is the only rational choice for performance, assuming the system supports it.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 7800M | AMD Radeon RX 590 |

|----------------|----------------------|-------------------|

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | GCN 4.0 |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 12 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 28,100 million | 5,700 million |

| Die Size | 346 mm² | 232 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 81.2M / mm² | 24.6M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1295 MHz | 1469 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2335 MHz | 1545 MHz |

| Game Clock | 2145 MHz | Not listed |

| Memory Clock | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) | 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 12 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 192 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 432.0 GB/s | 256.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 3840 | 2304 |

| TMUs | 240 | 144 |

| ROPs | 96 | 32 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 60 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 224.2 GPixel/s | 49.44 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 560.4 GTexel/s | 222.5 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 35.87 TFLOPS | 7.119 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 180 W | 175 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 450 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2024-09-10 | 2018-11-14 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | 279 USD |