Arc A580 vs Radeon R9 290

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 290 and Arc A580, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 290
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 275 Watt
21.06

Arc A580 outperforms R9 290 by a considerable 47% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking266182
Place by popularitynot in top-10084
Cost-effectiveness evaluation8.07no data
Power efficiency5.2812.22
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameHawaiiDG2-512
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date5 November 2013 (11 years ago)10 October 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$399 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores25603072
Core clock speed947 MHz1700 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2000 MHz
Number of transistors6,200 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)275 Watt175 Watt
Texture fill rate151.5384.0
Floating-point processing power4.849 TFLOPS12.29 TFLOPS
ROPs6496
TMUs160192
Tensor Coresno data384
Ray Tracing Coresno data24

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length275 mmno data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin2x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB8 GB
Memory bus width512 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth320.0 GB/s512.0 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI++

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.36.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3

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.

R9 290 21.06
Arc A580 31.00
+47.2%

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 290 8093
Arc A580 11916
+47.2%

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 290 11860
Arc A580 27574
+132%

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 HD65−70
−58.5%
103
+58.5%
1440p35−40
−57.1%
55
+57.1%
4K21−24
−57.1%
33
+57.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.14no data
1440p11.40no data
4K19.00no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 98
+0%
98
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 83
+0%
83
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 258
+0%
258
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 134
+0%
134
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 74
+0%
74
+0%
Dota 2 86
+0%
86
+0%
Far Cry 5 63
+0%
63
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 214
+0%
214
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 86
+0%
86
+0%
Metro Exodus 97
+0%
97
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
World of Tanks 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 67
+0%
67
+0%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 177
+0%
177
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 37
+0%
37
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 37
+0%
37
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
World of Tanks 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 44
+0%
44
+0%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130
+0%
130
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Metro Exodus 91
+0%
91
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55
+0%
55
+0%
Valorant 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 19
+0%
19
+0%
Dota 2 38
+0%
38
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 38
+0%
38
+0%
Metro Exodus 37
+0%
37
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 38
+0%
38
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 73
+0%
73
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

This is how R9 290 and Arc A580 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A580 is 58% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A580 is 57% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A580 is 57% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 56 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 21.06 31.00
Recency 5 November 2013 10 October 2023
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 275 Watt 175 Watt

Arc A580 has a 47.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 57.1% lower power consumption.

The Arc A580 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 290 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.


AMD Radeon R9 290
Radeon R9 290
Intel Arc A580
Arc A580

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.


4.1 576 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 335 votes

Rate Arc A580 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.