Radeon RX 590 vs R9 270

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 270 and Radeon RX 590, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 270
2013, $179
2 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
10.33

RX 590 outperforms R9 270 by a whopping 115% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking496290
Place by popularitynot in top-10094
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.5113.92
Power efficiency5.359.86
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameCuracaoPolaris 30
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date13 November 2013 (12 years ago)15 November 2018 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$179 $279

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

RX 590 has 209% better value for money than R9 270.

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 cores12802304
Core clock speedno data1469 MHz
Boost clock speed925 MHz1545 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 million5,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt175 Watt
Texture fill rate74.00222.5
Floating-point processing power2.368 TFLOPS7.119 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs80144
L1 Cache320 KB576 KB
L2 Cache512 KB2 MB

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length210 mm241 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin1x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB8 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s256.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
Eyefinity+-
HDMI++
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

CrossFire+-
FreeSync++
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
DDMA audio+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_0)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
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.

R9 270 10.33
RX 590 22.22
+115%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

R9 270 4314
Samples: 12
RX 590 9275
+115%
Samples: 4376

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.

R9 270 5930
RX 590 16814
+184%

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 HD45−50
−55.9%
102
1440p27−3060
+122%
4K16−1838
+138%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.982.74
+31.2%
1440p6.634.65
+29.9%
4K11.197.34
+34.4%
  • RX 590 has 31% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RX 590 has 30% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RX 590 has 34% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 60−65 60−65
Counter-Strike 2 120−130 120−130
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50 45−50
Resident Evil 4 Remake 50−55 50−55

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 60−65 60−65
Battlefield 5 133 133
Counter-Strike 2 120−130 120−130
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50 45−50
Far Cry 5 85 85
Fortnite 139 139
Forza Horizon 4 120 120
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120 120
Valorant 301 301

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 60−65 60−65
Battlefield 5 111 111
Counter-Strike 2 120−130 120−130
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260 250−260
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50 45−50
Dota 2 110−120 110−120
Far Cry 5 79 79
Fortnite 138 138
Forza Horizon 4 113 113
Grand Theft Auto V 79 79
Metro Exodus 52 52
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 108 108
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 88 88
Valorant 287 287

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 100 100
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50 45−50
Dota 2 110−120 110−120
Far Cry 5 74 74
Forza Horizon 4 91 91
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 83 83
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 51 51
Valorant 110 110

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 96 96

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 45−50 45−50
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170 160−170
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45 40−45
Metro Exodus 31 31
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 232 232

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 60−65 60−65
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24 21−24
Far Cry 5 50−55 50−55
Forza Horizon 4 55−60 55−60
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40 35−40

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 50−55 50−55

4K
High

Atomic Heart 18−20 18−20
Counter-Strike 2 21−24 21−24
Grand Theft Auto V 41 41
Metro Exodus 19 19
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 32 32
Valorant 113 113

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 40 40
Counter-Strike 2 21−24 21−24
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10 9−10
Dota 2 75−80 75−80
Far Cry 5 24 24
Forza Horizon 4 46 46
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35 35

4K
Epic

Fortnite 29 29

This is how R9 270 and RX 590 compete in popular games:

  • RX 590 is 127% faster in 1080p
  • RX 590 is 122% faster in 1440p
  • RX 590 is 138% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.33 22.22
Recency 13 November 2013 15 November 2018
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 175 Watt

R9 270 has 14% lower power consumption.

RX 590, on the other hand, has a 115% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 57% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 590 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 270 in performance tests.

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.


3.9 684 votes

Rate Radeon R9 270 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 3083 votes

Rate Radeon RX 590 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 270 or Radeon RX 590, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.