Radeon RX 7600 XT vs R9 M290X Crossfire

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire with Radeon RX 7600 XT, including specs and performance data.

R9 M290X Crossfire
2014
2x 4 GB GDDR5, 200 Watt
19.08

RX 7600 XT outperforms R9 M290X Crossfire by a whopping 135% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking29479
Place by popularitynot in top-10083
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data78.12
Power efficiency6.5816.25
ArchitectureGCN (2012−2015)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code nameNeptune CFNavi 33
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date1 March 2014 (10 years ago)8 January 2024 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$329

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 cores25602048
Core clock speed850 MHz1980 MHz
Boost clock speed900 MHz2755 MHz
Number of transistors2x 2800 Million13,300 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt190 Watt
Texture fill rateno data352.6
Floating-point processing powerno data22.57 TFLOPS
ROPsno data64
TMUsno data128
Ray Tracing Coresno data32

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 sizelargeno data
Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data204 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 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 amount2x 4 GB16 GB
Memory bus width2x 256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed4800 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data288.0 GB/s
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 Connectorsno data1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (FL 11_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.7
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.2
Vulkan-1.3

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 HD62
−126%
140−150
+126%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.35

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 30−35
−121%
75−80
+121%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−124%
85−90
+124%
Elden Ring 60−65
−133%
140−150
+133%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
−130%
140−150
+130%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
−121%
75−80
+121%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−124%
85−90
+124%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
−125%
180−190
+125%
Metro Exodus 50−55
−116%
110−120
+116%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
−127%
100−105
+127%
Valorant 75−80
−134%
180−190
+134%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
−130%
140−150
+130%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
−121%
75−80
+121%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−124%
85−90
+124%
Dota 2 65−70
−121%
150−160
+121%
Elden Ring 60−65
−133%
140−150
+133%
Far Cry 5 65−70
−131%
150−160
+131%
Fortnite 100−110
−125%
230−240
+125%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
−125%
180−190
+125%
Grand Theft Auto V 65−70
−124%
150−160
+124%
Metro Exodus 50−55
−116%
110−120
+116%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
−131%
300−310
+131%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
−127%
100−105
+127%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60−65
−133%
140−150
+133%
Valorant 75−80
−134%
180−190
+134%
World of Tanks 220−230
−121%
500−550
+121%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
−130%
140−150
+130%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
−121%
75−80
+121%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−124%
85−90
+124%
Dota 2 65−70
−121%
150−160
+121%
Far Cry 5 65−70
−131%
150−160
+131%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
−125%
180−190
+125%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
−131%
300−310
+131%
Valorant 75−80
−134%
180−190
+134%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 30−33
−133%
70−75
+133%
Elden Ring 30−35
−126%
70−75
+126%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−33
−133%
70−75
+133%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
−107%
350−400
+107%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
−106%
35−40
+106%
World of Tanks 130−140
−131%
300−310
+131%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
−131%
90−95
+131%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−119%
35−40
+119%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−133%
35−40
+133%
Far Cry 5 50−55
−120%
110−120
+120%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−124%
110−120
+124%
Metro Exodus 40−45
−133%
100−105
+133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
−131%
60−65
+131%
Valorant 45−50
−124%
110−120
+124%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−133%
35−40
+133%
Dota 2 30−35
−134%
75−80
+134%
Elden Ring 14−16
−114%
30−33
+114%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
−134%
75−80
+134%
Metro Exodus 14−16
−114%
30−33
+114%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
−128%
130−140
+128%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−125%
27−30
+125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
−134%
75−80
+134%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
−111%
40−45
+111%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−133%
35−40
+133%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−133%
14−16
+133%
Dota 2 30−35
−134%
75−80
+134%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−129%
55−60
+129%
Fortnite 21−24
−117%
50−55
+117%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−132%
65−70
+132%
Valorant 21−24
−127%
50−55
+127%

This is how R9 M290X Crossfire and RX 7600 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 7600 XT is 126% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 19.08 44.76
Recency 1 March 2014 8 January 2024
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 190 Watt

RX 7600 XT has a 134.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 5.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 7600 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire is a notebook card while Radeon RX 7600 XT is a desktop one.


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 M290X Crossfire
Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire
AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT
Radeon RX 7600 XT

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.


2.7 11 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 733 votes

Rate Radeon RX 7600 XT 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.