Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Meteor / Arrow Lake) vs Radeon R9 290

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 290 with Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Meteor / Arrow Lake), including specs and performance data.

R9 290
2013, $399
4 GB GDDR5, 275 Watt
19.35
+94.3%

R9 290 outperforms Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Meteor / Arrow Lake) by an impressive 94% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking318488
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation7.03no data
Power efficiency5.42no data
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Xe LPG (2023−2025)
GPU code nameHawaiino data
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date5 November 2013 (12 years ago)6 January 2025 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$399 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores256064
Core clock speed947 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1950 MHz
Number of transistors6,200 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nmno data
Power consumption (TDP)275 Wattno data
Texture fill rate151.5no data
Floating-point processing power4.849 TFLOPSno data
ROPs64no data
TMUs160no data
L1 Cache640 KBno data
L2 Cache1024 KBno data

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 x16no data
Length275 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GBno data
Memory bus width512 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1250 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth320.0 GB/sno data
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 DisplayPortno data
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)no data
Shader Model6.3no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.0no data
Vulkan1.2.131-

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 290 19.35
+94.3%
Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Meteor / Arrow Lake) 9.96

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
+132%
Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Meteor / Arrow Lake) 5118

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 HD35−40
+75%
20
−75%

Cost per frame, $

1080p11.40no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 50
+0%
50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 48
+0%
48
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 24
+0%
24
+0%
Fortnite 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 22
+0%
22
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 22
+0%
22
+0%
Fortnite 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16
+0%
16
+0%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 31
+0%
31
+0%
Valorant 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 21
+0%
21
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16
+0%
16
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

This is how R9 290 and Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Meteor / Arrow Lake) compete in popular games:

  • R9 290 is 75% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 54 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 19.35 9.96
Recency 5 November 2013 6 January 2025

R9 290 has a 94.3% higher aggregate performance score.

Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Meteor / Arrow Lake), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 11 years.

The Radeon R9 290 is our recommended choice as it beats the Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Meteor / Arrow Lake) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 290 is a desktop graphics card while Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Meteor / Arrow Lake) 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 R9 290
Radeon R9 290
Intel Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Meteor / Arrow Lake)
Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Meteor / Arrow Lake)

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.


4.1 623 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Meteor / Arrow Lake) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 290 or Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Meteor / Arrow Lake), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.