Select any two GPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game Radeon R9 290X Asus DirectCU II Edition GeForce GTX 590 EVGA Classified Hydro Copper Edition
Red Dead Redemption 2 9% 34%
Cyberpunk 2077 50% 84%
Doom Eternal 6% 15%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9% 34%
Dragon Ball Z Kakarot 33% 17%
Halo: Reach 65% 57%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 50% 84%
Star Wars: Jedi - Fallen Order 50% 84%
Grand Theft Auto VI 67% 105%
Need For Speed Heat 9% 34%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the AMD Radeon R9 290X Asus DirectCU II Edition are noticeably better than the Nvidia GeForce GTX 590 EVGA Classified Hydro Copper Edition.

The R9 290X has a 370 MHz higher core clock speed and 48 more Texture Mapping Units than the GTX 590. This results in the R9 290X providing 95.4 GTexel/s better texturing performance. This still holds weight but shader performance is generally more relevant, particularly since both of these GPUs support at least DirectX 10.

The R9 290X has a 370 MHz higher core clock speed but 32 fewer Render Output Units than the GTX 590. The lower ROP count doesn't matter, though, as altogether the R9 290X manages to provide 3.5 GPixel/s better pixeling performance. However, both GPUs support DirectX 9 or above, and pixeling performance is only really relevant when comparing older cards.

The R9 290X was released over a year more recently than the GTX 590, and so the R9 290X is likely to have better driver support, meaning it will be more optimized for running the latest games when compared to the GTX 590.

Both GPUs exhibit very powerful performance, so it probably isn't worth upgrading from one to the other, as both are capable of running even the most demanding games at the highest settings.

The R9 290X has 1024 MB more video memory than the GTX 590, so is likely to be much better at displaying game textures at higher resolutions. However, the overall memory performance is about the same.

The GTX 590 has 11.8 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the R9 290X, which means that the memory performance of the GTX 590 is slightly better than the R9 290X.

The Radeon R9 290X Asus DirectCU II Edition has 2816 Shader Processing Units and the GeForce GTX 590 EVGA Classified Hydro Copper Edition has 1024. However, the actual shader performance of the R9 290X is 2394 and the actual shader performance of the GTX 590 is 1290. The R9 290X having 1104 better shader performance and an altogether better performance when taking into account other relevant data means that the R9 290X delivers a significantly smoother and more efficient experience when processing graphical data than the GTX 590.

The R9 290X transistor size technology is 12 nm (nanometers) smaller than the GTX 590. This means that the R9 290X is expected to run slightly cooler and achieve higher clock frequencies than the GTX 590.

The Radeon R9 290X Asus DirectCU II Edition requires 300 Watts to run and the GeForce GTX 590 EVGA Classified Hydro Copper Edition requires 365 Watts. We would recommend a PSU with at least 750 Watts for the R9 290X and a PSU with at least 700 Watts for the GTX 590. The GTX 590 requires 65 Watts more than the R9 290X to run. The difference is significant enough that the GTX 590 may have an adverse affect on your yearly electricity bills in comparison to the R9 290X.

Game FPS Benchmarks On Ultra

GPU Architecture

Core Speed1000 MHzvs630 MHz
Boost Clock-vs-
ArchitectureGCN 1.1 Hawaii XTFermi GF110-351-A1
OC Potential Fair vs Poor
Driver Support Great vs Poor
Release Date06 Jan 2014vs24 Mar 2011
GPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved
Comparison

Resolution Performance

1366x768 - green tick vs green tick -
1600x900
10
green tick vs green tick
10
1920x1080
9.8
green tick vs
8.9
2560x1440
7.5
green tick vs
6.6
3840x2160
5.7
green tick vs -

GPU Memory

Memory4096 MBvs3072 MB
Memory Speed1250 MHzvs864 MHz
Memory Bus512 Bitvs768 Bit
Memory TypeGDDR5vsGDDR5
Memory Bandwidth320GB/secvs331.8GB/sec
L2 Cache 1024 KB vs green tick 1536 KB
Delta Color Compression no vs no
Memory Performance 0% green tick vs green tick 0%
Comparison

GPU Display

Shader Processing Units2816vs1024
Actual Shader Performance100%vs62%
Technology28nmvs40nm
Texture Mapping Units176vs128
Texture Rate176 GTexel/svs80.6 GTexel/s
Render Output Units64vs96
Pixel Rate64 GPixel/svs60.5 GPixel/s
Comparison

GPU Outputs

Max Digital Resolution (WxH)4096x2160vs2560x1600
VGA Connections0vs0
DVI Connections2vs2
HDMI Connections1vs1
DisplayPort Connections-vs-
Comparison

GPU Power Requirements

Max Power300 Wattsvs365 Watts
Recommended PSU750 Watts & 50 Ampsvs700 Watts & 46 Amps

GPU Features

DirectX12.0vs12.0
Shader Model5.0vs5.0
Open GL4.4vs4.5
Open CL-vs-
Notebook GPUnono
SLI/Crossfireyesvsyes
Dedicatedyesvsyes
Comparison

GPU Supporting Hardware

Recommended ProcessorIntel Core i7-4770K 4-Core 3.5GHzvsIntel Core i7-2700K 4-Core 3.50GHz
Recommended RAM8 GBvs12 GB
Maximum Recommended Gaming Resolution2560x1440vs2560x1600

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

GPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewOverview
Radeon R9 290X Asus DirectCU II Edition is a special edition of AMD's High-End Radeon R9 290X, created by Asus.

Overclock: Central Unit
The Central Unit Remains the Same.

Overclock: Memory Clock
The Operating Memory Clock and the Frame Buffer remain the same.

Cooling Solution
Exclusive DirectCU II thermal design includes a direct-GPU contact 10mm copper heatpipe and 220% larger dissipation area to boost heat removal efficiency. It performs 20% cooler and 3X quieter than reference.

Performance
Without Any Overclock Out of The Box, Radeon R9 290X Asus DirectCU II Edition is as fast as the reference Radeon R9 290X.
GeForce GTX 590 EVGA Classified Hydro Copper is a special edition of the dual-graphics solution GeForce GTX 590.
This edition comes overclocked out of the box in the central unit that went from 608MHz to 630MHz and in the operating memory clock, which is now of 864MHz. Furthermore, it features a new cooling system which keeps the card cool under load.
Benchmarks indicate a 5% performance boost over the reference card and so it proves to be faster than GeForce GTX 680.
Recommended CPU
Possible GPU Upgrades
-
GPU Variants
-
-

Title

Body