Qualcomm Adreno 690 vs Radeon R9 390

Place in the ranking	245	807
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	11.63	no data
Power efficiency	5.79	26.81
Architecture	GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)	no data
GPU code name	Grenada	no data
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Design	reference	no data
Release date	18 June 2015 (9 years ago)	6 December 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$329	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 cores	2560	no data
Boost clock speed	1000 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	6,200 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	275 Watt	7 Watt
Texture fill rate	160.0	no data
Floating-point processing power	5.12 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	64	no data
TMUs	160	no 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).

Bus support	PCIe 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	no data
Length	275 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1 x 6-pin, 1 x 8-pin	no data
Bridgeless CrossFire	+	-

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	no data
High bandwidth memory (HBM)	-	no data
Maximum RAM amount	0 MB	no data
Memory bus width	512 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	1000 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	384 GB/s	no 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 Connectors	2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort	no data
Eyefinity	+	-
Number of Eyefinity displays	6	no data
HDMI	+	-
DisplayPort support	+	-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire	+	-
FreeSync	+	-
PowerTune	+	-
TrueAudio	+	-
VCE	+	-
DDMA audio	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	DirectX® 12	12
Shader Model	6.3	no data
OpenGL	4.6	no data
OpenCL	2.0	no data
Vulkan	+	-
Mantle	+	-

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 390 23.16
+748%

Qualcomm Adreno 690 2.73

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 390 8901
+749%

Qualcomm Adreno 690 1049

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 390 12730
+334%

Qualcomm Adreno 690 2933

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 HD

190−200
+726%

−726%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

1.73

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Elden Ring	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Valorant	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Dota 2	14 +0%	14 +0%
Elden Ring	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Far Cry 5	16 +0%	16 +0%
Fortnite	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Valorant	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
World of Tanks	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Dota 2	35 +0%	35 +0%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Valorant	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Elden Ring	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
World of Tanks	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Valorant	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Elden Ring	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Far Cry 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Fortnite	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	0−1
Valorant	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%

This is how R9 390 and Qualcomm Adreno 690 compete in popular games:

R9 390 is 726% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 58 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	23.16	2.73
Recency	18 June 2015	6 December 2018
Chip lithography	28 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	275 Watt	7 Watt

R9 390 has a 748.4% higher aggregate performance score.

Qualcomm Adreno 690, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 460% more advanced lithography process, and 3828.6% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 390 is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm Adreno 690 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 390 is a desktop card while Qualcomm Adreno 690 is a notebook one.

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