GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of R9 M290X vs 750M among Laptop GPUs over 35W TDP

Gaming

Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 21 more

Graphics

T-Rex, Manhattan, Sky Diver Factor and Fire Strike Factor

Computing

Face Detection, Ocean Surface Simulation and 3 more

Performance per Watt

Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 31 more

Value

Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 31 more

Noise and Power

TDP, Idle Power Consumption, Load Power Consumption and 2 more

6.4

Overall Score

Winner
AMD Radeon R9 M290X 

GPUBoss recommends the AMD Radeon R9 M290X  based on its gaming, benchmarks and compute performance.

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with GPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

AMD Radeon R9 M290X

GPUBoss Winner
Front view of Radeon R9 M290X

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Radeon R9 M290X

Reasons to consider the
AMD Radeon R9 M290X

Report a correction
Much better PassMark score 4,284 vs 1,288 More than 3.2x better PassMark score
Much better 3DMark vantage graphics score 24,205 vs 8,200 Around 3x better 3DMark vantage graphics score
Significantly higher memory bandwidth 153.6 GB/s vs 64 GB/s Around 2.5x higher memory bandwidth
More memory 4,096 MB vs 2,048 MB 2x more memory
Better floating-point performance 2,304 GFLOPS vs 722.7 GFLOPS Around 3.2x better floating-point performance
Much higher crysis 3 framerate 22.8 fps vs 9.85 fps More than 2.2x higher crysis 3 framerate
Higher pixel rate 28.8 GPixel/s vs 7.53 GPixel/s More than 3.8x higher pixel rate
Higher texture rate 72 GTexel/s vs 30.11 GTexel/s Around 2.5x higher texture rate
Significantly better particle simulation score 350.88 mInteraction/s vs 146.77 mInteraction/s Around 2.5x better particle simulation score
Significantly more shading units 1,280 vs 384 896 more shading units
Much better PassMark direct compute score 2,527 vs 733 Around 3.5x better PassMark direct compute score
Higher effective memory clock speed 4,800 MHz vs 4,000 MHz 20% higher effective memory clock speed
More texture mapping units 80 vs 32 48 more texture mapping units
Significantly higher metro: last light framerate 33.1 vs 11.85 More than 2.8x higher metro: last light framerate
More render output processors 32 vs 16 Twice as many render output processors
Significantly wider memory bus 256 bit vs 128 bit 2x wider memory bus
Significantly higher BioShock infinite framerate 46.8 fps vs 16.3 fps More than 2.8x higher BioShock infinite framerate
Higher memory clock speed 1,200 MHz vs 1,000 MHz 20% higher memory clock speed
Front view of GeForce GT 750M

Reasons to consider the
Nvidia GeForce GT 750M

Report a correction
Much better 3DMark06 score 13,670 vs 6,817 More than 2x better 3DMark06 score
Higher clock speed 941 MHz vs 850 MHz More than 10% higher clock speed
Significantly better manhattan score 3,570.08 vs 2,047.22 Around 75% better manhattan score
Higher turbo clock speed 967 MHz vs 900 MHz More than 5% higher turbo clock speed
Lower TDP 50W vs 100W 2x lower TDP

Benchmarks Real world tests of Radeon R9 M290X vs GeForce GT 750M

Bitcoin mining Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 M290X
258.05 mHash/s
GeForce GT 750M
27.59 mHash/s

Face detection Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 M290X
54.52 mPixels/s
GeForce GT 750M
16.18 mPixels/s

Ocean surface simulation Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 M290X
1,134.46 frames/s
GeForce GT 750M
251.62 frames/s

T-Rex (GFXBench 3.0) Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 M290X
3,324.52
GeForce GT 750M
3,360.34

Manhattan (GFXBench 3.0) Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 M290X
2,047.22
GeForce GT 750M
3,570.08

Battlefield 4

Bioshock Infinite

Comments

comments powered by Disqus