Radeon R5 (Carrizo) vs R9 290

#ad 
Buy
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 290 with Radeon R5 (Carrizo), including specs and performance data.

R9 290
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 275 Watt
18.11
+1046%

R9 290 outperforms R5 (Carrizo) by a whopping 1046% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking278937
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.95no data
Power efficiency5.213.57
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)GCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016)
GPU code nameHawaiiCarrizo
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date5 November 2013 (11 years ago)4 June 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$399 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 cores2560256
Core clock speed947 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data800 MHz
Number of transistors6,200 million2410 Million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)275 Watt12-35 Watt
Texture fill rate151.5no data
Floating-point processing power4.849 TFLOPSno data
ROPs64no data
TMUs160no 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).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
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 Bit64/128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth320.0 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 data
HDMI+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

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

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.

R9 290 18.11
+1046%
R5 (Carrizo) 1.58

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
+1085%
R5 (Carrizo) 1001

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

Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 51 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 18.11 1.58
Recency 5 November 2013 4 June 2015
Power consumption (TDP) 275 Watt 12 Watt

R9 290 has a 1046.2% higher aggregate performance score.

R5 (Carrizo), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 2191.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 290 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R5 (Carrizo) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 290 is a desktop card while Radeon R5 (Carrizo) 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
AMD Radeon R5 (Carrizo)
Radeon R5 (Carrizo)

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.


4.1 588 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 6 votes

Rate Radeon R5 (Carrizo) 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 Radeon R5 (Carrizo), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.