Radeon R9 290 vs GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile with Radeon R9 290, including specs and performance data.

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile
2021
4 GB GDDR6, 60 Watt
21.90
+13.2%

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile outperforms R9 290 by a moderate 13% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking298326
Place by popularity46not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data7.11
Power efficiency28.435.48
ArchitectureAmpere (2020−2025)GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code nameGN20-P0Hawaii
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date11 May 2021 (5 years ago)5 November 2013 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$399

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores20482560
Core clock speed1238 MHz947 MHz
Boost clock speed1500 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data6,200 million
Manufacturing process technology8 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)60 Watt (35 - 80 Watt TGP)275 Watt
Texture fill rateno data151.5
Floating-point processing powerno data4.849 TFLOPS
ROPsno data64
TMUsno data160
L1 Cacheno data640 KB
L2 Cacheno data1024 KB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizelargeno data
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data275 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR6GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit512 Bit
Memory clock speed12000 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data320.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR+-

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectorsno data2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12_212 (12_0)
Shader Modelno data6.3
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.0
Vulkan-1.2.131

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile 21.90
+13.2%
R9 290 19.34

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile 11949
+0.8%
R9 290 11860

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD59
+18%
50−55
1440p43
+22.9%
35−40
4K27
+28.6%
21−24

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data7.98
1440pno data11.40
4Kno data19.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 71
+18.3%
60−65
Counter-Strike 2 170
+13.3%
150−160
Cyberpunk 2077 66
+20%
55−60

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 54
+20%
45−50
Battlefield 5 93
+16.3%
80−85
Counter-Strike 2 125
+13.6%
110−120
Cyberpunk 2077 52
+15.6%
45−50
Far Cry 5 68
+13.3%
60−65
Fortnite 110−120
+18.9%
95−100
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+20%
75−80
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+16%
75−80
Valorant 150−160
+20.8%
130−140

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 32
+18.5%
27−30
Battlefield 5 89
+18.7%
75−80
Counter-Strike 2 36
+20%
30−33
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 240−250
+18.6%
210−220
Cyberpunk 2077 41
+17.1%
35−40
Dota 2 118
+18%
100−105
Far Cry 5 64
+16.4%
55−60
Far Cry 6 60
+20%
50−55
Fortnite 110−120
+18.9%
95−100
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+20%
75−80
Grand Theft Auto V 86
+14.7%
75−80
Metro Exodus 49
+22.5%
40−45
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+16%
75−80
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 81
+15.7%
70−75
Valorant 150−160
+20.8%
130−140

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 83
+18.6%
70−75
Cyberpunk 2077 34
+13.3%
30−33
Dota 2 112
+17.9%
95−100
Far Cry 5 61
+22%
50−55
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+20%
75−80
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+16%
75−80
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
+15%
40−45
Valorant 150−160
+20.8%
130−140

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 110−120
+18.9%
95−100

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+17.5%
40−45
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
+14.3%
140−150
Far Cry 6 50
+25%
40−45
Grand Theft Auto V 48
+20%
40−45
Metro Exodus 29
+20.8%
24−27
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+16%
150−160
Valorant 180−190
+15%
160−170

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 66
+20%
55−60
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+28.6%
14−16
Far Cry 5 49
+22.5%
40−45
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+14%
50−55
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+16.7%
30−33

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 50−55
+17.8%
45−50

4K
High

Atomic Heart 18−20
+28.6%
14−16
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+22.2%
18−20
Far Cry 6 12−14
+20%
10−11
Grand Theft Auto V 44
+25.7%
35−40
Metro Exodus 17
+21.4%
14−16
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
+20.8%
24−27
Valorant 120−130
+22%
100−105

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35
+16.7%
30−33
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+22.2%
18−20
Cyberpunk 2077 6
+20%
5−6
Dota 2 62
+24%
50−55
Far Cry 5 19
+18.8%
16−18
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+30%
30−33
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+27.8%
18−20

4K
Epic

Fortnite 24−27
+14.3%
21−24

This is how RTX 3050 4GB Mobile and R9 290 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is 18% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is 23% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is 29% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 21.90 19.34
Recency 11 May 2021 5 November 2013
Chip lithography 8 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 60 Watt 275 Watt

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile has a 13% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 71% more advanced lithography process, and 78% lower power consumption.

The GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 290 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is a notebook graphics card while Radeon R9 290 is a desktop one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.8 2140 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 628 votes

Rate Radeon R9 290 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile or Radeon R9 290, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.