GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of RX 460 vs R9 290 among Desktop GPUs

Gaming

Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 21 more

Graphics

T-Rex, Manhattan, Cloud Gate Factor, Sky Diver Factor and 1 more

Computing

Face Detection, Ocean Surface Simulation and 3 more

Performance per Watt

Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more

Value

Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more

Noise and Power

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

No winner declared

Too close to call

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
Front view of Radeon R9 290

AMD Radeon R9 290

GPUBoss Winner

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Radeon RX 460

Reasons to consider the
AMD Radeon RX 460

Report a correction
Significantly higher effective memory clock speed 7,000 MHz vs 5,000 MHz 40% higher effective memory clock speed
Higher clock speed 1,090 MHz vs 947 MHz More than 15% higher clock speed
Much higher memory clock speed 1,750 MHz vs 1,125 MHz More than 55% higher memory clock speed
Higher turbo clock speed 1,200 MHz vs 947 MHz More than 25% higher turbo clock speed
Much lower TDP 75W vs 300W 4x lower TDP
Front view of Radeon R9 290

Reasons to consider the
AMD Radeon R9 290

Report a correction
Much higher memory bandwidth 320 GB/s vs 112 GB/s More than 2.8x higher memory bandwidth
Significantly better PassMark score 7,049 vs 4,329 Around 65% better PassMark score
Significantly better floating-point performance 4,800 GFLOPS vs 2,150.4 GFLOPS Around 2.2x better floating-point performance
Significantly higher pixel rate 60.6 GPixel/s vs 19.2 GPixel/s Around 3.2x higher pixel rate
More memory 4,096 MB vs 2,048 MB 2x more memory
Significantly higher texture rate 152 GTexel/s vs 67.2 GTexel/s More than 2.2x higher texture rate
Many more render output processors 64 vs 16 48 more render output processors
Many more shading units 2,560 vs 896 1664 more shading units
Many more texture mapping units 160 vs 56 104 more texture mapping units
Much better fire strike factor score 71.97 vs 35.49 More than 2x better fire strike factor score
Much wider memory bus 512 bit vs 128 bit 4x wider memory bus
Significantly more compute units 40 vs 14 26 more compute units
Significantly better bitcoin mining score 540.64 mHash/s vs 239.17 mHash/s More than 2.2x better bitcoin mining score
Significantly higher crysis 3 framerate 51 vs 25.3 More than 2x higher crysis 3 framerate
Better PassMark direct compute score 3,242 vs 2,488 More than 30% better PassMark direct compute score

Benchmarks Real world tests of Radeon RX 460 vs R9 290

Bitcoin mining Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon RX 460
239.17 mHash/s
Radeon R9 290
540.64 mHash/s

Face detection Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon RX 460
55.12 mPixels/s
Radeon R9 290
108.61 mPixels/s

Ocean surface simulation Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon RX 460
971.19 frames/s
Radeon R9 290
1,366.31 frames/s

T-Rex (GFXBench 3.0) Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon RX 460
3,359.76
Radeon R9 290
3,355.08

Manhattan (GFXBench 3.0) Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon RX 460
3,716.78
Radeon R9 290
3,713.56

Fire Strike Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Sky Diver Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Crysis 3

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus