Quadro NVS 290 vs Radeon HD 6790

Place in the ranking	684	1204
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.86	0.03
Power efficiency	1.92	1.93
Architecture	TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	Barts	G86
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	4 April 2011 (13 years ago)	4 October 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$149	$149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

HD 6790 has 2767% better value for money than NVS 290.

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 cores	800	16
Core clock speed	840 MHz	459 MHz
Number of transistors	1,700 million	210 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	21 Watt
Texture fill rate	33.60	3.672
Floating-point processing power	1.344 TFLOPS	0.02938 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	4
TMUs	40	8

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).

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 1.0 x16
Length	198 mm	168 mm
Width	2-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	None

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 type	GDDR5	DDR2
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	256 MB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	1050 MHz	400 MHz
Memory bandwidth	134.4 GB/s	6.4 GB/s

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 Connectors	2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort	1x DMS-59
HDMI	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.2 (11_0)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	5.0	4.0
OpenGL	4.4	3.3
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	-	1.1

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.

HD 6790 4.21
+614%

NVS 290 0.59

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.

HD 6790 1621
+611%

NVS 290 228

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:

900p	52 +643%	7−8 −643%
Full HD	60 +650%	8−9 −650%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

2.48

18.63

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

7−8

0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4	0−1
Battlefield 5	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8	0−1
Far Cry 5	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +733%	3−4 −733%
Hitman 3	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 +833%	3−4 −833%
Metro Exodus	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +617%	6−7 −617%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4	0−1
Battlefield 5	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8	0−1
Far Cry 5	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +733%	3−4 −733%
Hitman 3	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 +833%	3−4 −833%
Metro Exodus	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +617%	6−7 −617%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8	0−1
Far Cry 5	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +733%	3−4 −733%
Hitman 3	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 +833%	3−4 −833%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +617%	6−7 −617%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−12
+1000%

1−2

−1000%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7	0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3	0−1
Far Cry 5	5−6	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	6−7	0−1
Hitman 3	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	24−27 +767%	3−4 −767%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9
+700%

1−2

−700%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4	0−1
Hitman 3	0−1	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2	0−1
Metro Exodus	1−2	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	2−3	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	3−4	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6

0−1

This is how HD 6790 and NVS 290 compete in popular games:

HD 6790 is 643% faster in 900p
HD 6790 is 650% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	4.21	0.59
Recency	4 April 2011	4 October 2007
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	256 MB
Chip lithography	40 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	21 Watt

HD 6790 has a 613.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

NVS 290, on the other hand, has 614.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon HD 6790 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 290 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 6790 is a desktop card while Quadro NVS 290 is a workstation one.

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