Radeon R9 M290X vs GeForce GTX 680M SLI

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 680M SLI and Radeon R9 M290X, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 680M SLI
2012
2x 4 GB GDDR5
16.62
+96.9%

GTX 680M SLI outperforms R9 M290X by an impressive 97% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking325497
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data5.87
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameN13E-GTXNeptune
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date4 June 2012 (12 years ago)9 January 2014 (10 years ago)

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores26881280
Compute unitsno data20
Core clock speed720 MHz850 MHz
Boost clock speedno data900 MHz
Number of transistorsno data2,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data100 Watt
Texture fill rateno data72.00
Floating-point processing powerno data2.304 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data80

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 sizelargelarge
Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone
SLI options+-

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 amount2x 4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width2x 256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed3600 MHz1200 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data153.6 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectorsno dataNo outputs
Eyefinity-+

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync-+
HD3D-+
PowerTune-+
DualGraphics-+
ZeroCore-+
Switchable graphics-+
Optimus+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX11DirectX® 11
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.4
OpenCLno dataNot Listed
Mantle-+
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 680M SLI 16.62
+96.9%
R9 M290X 8.44

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTX 680M SLI 10952
+60.7%
R9 M290X 6817

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GTX 680M SLI 32635
+36.2%
R9 M290X 23961

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

GTX 680M SLI 108
+73.4%
R9 M290X 62

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:

900p133
+105%
65−70
−105%
Full HD98
+113%
46
−113%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+100%
12−14
−100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+76.2%
21−24
−76.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
+125%
12−14
−125%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+108%
24−27
−108%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+94.1%
16−18
−94.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+100%
12−14
−100%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+105%
18−20
−105%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+87.5%
24−27
−87.5%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+87.5%
55−60
−87.5%
Hitman 3 30−35
+100%
16−18
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+70.8%
45−50
−70.8%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+115%
24−27
−115%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+95.7%
21−24
−95.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+92.9%
27−30
−92.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+41.4%
55−60
−41.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+76.2%
21−24
−76.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
+125%
12−14
−125%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+108%
24−27
−108%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+94.1%
16−18
−94.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+100%
12−14
−100%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+105%
18−20
−105%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+87.5%
24−27
−87.5%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+87.5%
55−60
−87.5%
Hitman 3 30−35
+100%
16−18
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+70.8%
45−50
−70.8%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+115%
24−27
−115%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+95.7%
21−24
−95.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+92.9%
27−30
−92.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+58.3%
24−27
−58.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+41.4%
55−60
−41.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+76.2%
21−24
−76.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
+125%
12−14
−125%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+94.1%
16−18
−94.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+100%
12−14
−100%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+105%
18−20
−105%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+87.5%
55−60
−87.5%
Hitman 3 30−35
+100%
16−18
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+70.8%
45−50
−70.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+92.9%
27−30
−92.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+58.3%
24−27
−58.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+41.4%
55−60
−41.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+95.7%
21−24
−95.7%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+100%
16−18
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+92.3%
12−14
−92.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+113%
8−9
−113%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+125%
8−9
−125%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+90%
10−11
−90%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+159%
30−35
−159%
Hitman 3 20−22
+66.7%
12−14
−66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+83.3%
18−20
−83.3%
Metro Exodus 30−33
+173%
10−12
−173%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
+244%
9−10
−244%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+125%
8−9
−125%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−105
+85.2%
50−55
−85.2%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+92.9%
14−16
−92.9%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+100%
8−9
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%
Hitman 3 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+163%
30−35
−163%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+183%
6−7
−183%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+120%
10−11
−120%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+325%
4−5
−325%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%

This is how GTX 680M SLI and R9 M290X compete in popular games:

  • GTX 680M SLI is 105% faster in 900p
  • GTX 680M SLI is 113% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 680M SLI is 325% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 680M SLI surpassed R9 M290X in all 72 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 16.62 8.44
Recency 4 June 2012 9 January 2014

GTX 680M SLI has a 96.9% higher aggregate performance score.

R9 M290X, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year.

The GeForce GTX 680M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M290X in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M SLI
GeForce GTX 680M SLI
AMD Radeon R9 M290X
Radeon R9 M290X

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.7 3 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 680M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 12 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M290X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.