Radeon R9 290X2 vs R9 Nano

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking247not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.34no data
Power efficiency8.70no data
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code nameFijiHawaii
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date27 August 2015 (9 years ago)24 June 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$649 $1,399

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 cores40962816
Compute units64no data
Core clock speedno data1000 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHzno data
Number of transistors8,900 million6,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)175 Watt580 Watt
Texture fill rate256.0176.0
Floating-point processing power8.192 TFLOPS5.632 TFLOPS
ROPs6464
TMUs256176

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 supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length152 mmno data
Width2-slot3-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pin4x 8-pin
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 typeHigh Bandwidth Memory (HBM)GDDR5
High bandwidth memory (HBM)+no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width4096 Bit512 Bit
Memory clock speed500 MHz1350 MHz
Memory bandwidth512 GB/s345.6 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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Eyefinity+-
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
HDMI++
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration+-
CrossFire+-
FRTC+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
PowerTune+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
ZeroCore+-
VCE+-
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_0)
Shader Model6.36.3
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL2.02.0
Vulkan+1.2.131
Mantle+-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 27 August 2015 24 June 2014
Power consumption (TDP) 175 Watt 580 Watt

R9 Nano has an age advantage of 1 year, and 231.4% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R9 Nano and Radeon R9 290X2. We've got no test results to judge.


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 Nano
Radeon R9 Nano
AMD Radeon R9 290X2
Radeon R9 290X2

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.3 90 votes

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

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

Rate Radeon R9 290X2 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.