Radeon HD 7290 vs R7 265

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 265 with Radeon HD 7290, including specs and performance data.

R7 265
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
8.99
+3496%

R7 265 outperforms HD 7290 by a whopping 3496% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking4461350
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.58no data
Power efficiency4.771.11
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code namePitcairnLoveland
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date13 February 2014 (11 years ago)6 June 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores102480
Core clock speedno data400 MHz
Boost clock speed925 MHz400 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 million450 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate59.203.200
Floating-point processing power1.894 TFLOPS0.064 TFLOPS
ROPs324
TMUs648

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 x16IGP
Length210 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinno data

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1400 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/sno data
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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
DDMA audio+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1211.2 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.0
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan-N/A

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 0−1 0−1

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 28 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.99 0.25
Recency 13 February 2014 6 June 2012
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 18 Watt

R7 265 has a 3496% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

HD 7290, on the other hand, has 733.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R7 265 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7290 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 265 is a desktop card while Radeon HD 7290 is a notebook one.

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.


AMD Radeon R7 265
Radeon R7 265
AMD Radeon HD 7290
Radeon HD 7290

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.


3.1 373 votes

Rate Radeon R7 265 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 21 vote

Rate Radeon HD 7290 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R7 265 or Radeon HD 7290, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.