Based on the size of its R9 290X Lightning, it appears that MSI has a thing for overkill. But the company might also be onto something. As we already know, cooling AMD's Hawaii GPU properly is what separates the men from the boys. Forget about re-purposing cooling solutions from other cards. Asus tried that and it didn't go over well at all. Instead, MSI sent over a three-slot take on the Radeon R9 290X, which, as you can see, employs a trio of cooling fans and a lot of metal dedicated to keeping that hot graphics processor operating within its comfort zone.
This thing isn't a toy. A $700 price tag, tied for the most-expensive Radeon on Newegg, makes you think hard before dropping nearly $150 more than the cheapest models with aftermarket cooling.
Even the Lightning's box is massive; it includes an extra compartment with lots of accessories and a certificate of ownership. You're dealing with a limited-edition piece of hardware, after all.
The snazzy-looking board and high-end packaging (not to mention lofty price) naturally have us expecting quite a bit out of MSI's R9 290X Lightning. Historically, the company reserves this branding for its flagship models. Does this board live up to that standard? It's time to break out the lab gear and find out.
Box Style and Contents
The number of accessories you get with this card is impressive, though we question the wisdom of including 6-to-8-pin adapter cables. Why solder eight-pin plugs to the card and then encourage users to fry thinner cables that might not be suitable for driving a high-end GPU? The same goes for the bundled Molex adapter. Who in their right mind would make up the balance of too-few cables by tapping into a pair of four-pin plugs? We've woken up to the smell of smoke in the morning; it's not fun. Seriously. We expect folks who buy $700 graphics cards to use similarly enthusiast-oriented PSUs.
Beyond the manual and CD (which contains the drivers, MSI's Afterburner software, and a fan control utility for the three fans), the box contains a metal plate, thermal pads, and screws. The plate fits over the DC-DC converters when you embark on an extreme overclocking mission, go the water cooling route, and remove the massive heat sink.
Lab Note about the Dimensions
The dimensions reported here don't necessarily match the manufacturer's official technical specifications. Rather, we measure them by hand to assure they're correct. The image and chart below should help illustrate what each measurement actually means. Auxiliary PCI Express power connectors are not included; they have to be added depending on the power plug and cable design.
Size Comparison
MSI's R9 290X Lightning is as long as the Sapphire R9 290X Tri-X. However, it monopolizes three expansion slots, and is a tad higher, too. As a result, we're fairly certain it's the bulkiest Radeon R9 290X we've tested thus far.
| Models | Length L | Height H | Depth D1 | Depth D2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Asus R9290X-DC2OC-4GD5 R9 290X DirectCU II OC | 11.3" / 288 mm | 5.6" / 142 mm | 1.5" / 38 mm | 0.16" / 4 mm |
| Sapphire Tri-X OC R9 290X | 12.0" / 305 mm | 4.5" / 114 mm | 1.5" / 38 mm | 0.16" / 4 mm |
| Gigabyte GV-R929XOC-4GD R9 290X Windforce OC | 11.1" / 282 mm | 4.8" / 123 mm | 1.5" / 38 mm | 0.16" / 4 mm |
| HIS R9 290X IceQ X² Turbo | 11.7" / 297 mm | 5.3" / 135 mm | 1.4" / 36 mm | 0.16" / 4 mm |
| MSI R9 290X Gaming 4G | 11.0" / 279 mm | 4.7" / 120 mm | 1.5" / 38 mm | 0.24" / 6 mm |
| MSI R9 290X Lightning | 12.0" / 305 mm | 4.8" / 122 mm | 2.1" / 53 mm | 0.2" / 5 mm |
Weight Comparison
The weight of a card might be interesting if you're trying to figure out if any additional support is needed, or to calculate the amount of stress your motherboard might be under in a CrossFire-based setup. Since MSI's offering is by far the heaviest in this field, we want to emphasize the importance of bracing it somehow, even if you're only able to use cable ties.
| Models | |
|---|---|
| Asus R9290X-DC2OC-4GD5 R9 290X DirectCU II OC | 2.5 lbs / 1135 g |
| Sapphire Tri-X OC R9 290X | 2.25 lbs / 1022 g |
| Gigabyte GV-R929XOC-4GD R9 290X Windforce OC | 2.32 lbs / 1053 g |
| HIS R9 290X IceQ X² Turbo | 2.15 lbs / 976 g |
| MSI R9 290X Gaming 4G | 2.29 lbs / 1038 g |
| MSI R9 290X Lightning | 3.49 lbs / 1581 g |
Front and Rear Views
The front of the card is dominated by three fans. The black 90 mm fans on the left and right are controlled as a pair, but the yellow 74 mm cooler in the middle can be controlled independently. As mentioned, MSI's bundled disc comes with software that lets you manually configure fan profiles.
Unfortunately, the latest beta build of AMD's Catalyst driver introduces a bug that prevents MSI's Advanced Fan Control (AFC) feature from working. Older versions of Catalyst don't have this problem, and AMD tells us that the bug will be fixed soon.
A massive back plate and the frame on top sandwich the PCB and prevent it from flexing.
Cooler and PCB
The CPU is covered by a massive heat sink; two 8 mm and three 6 mm heat pipes draw heat from the GPU and dissipate it through the vertically-oriented cooling fins, which are split into left and right sections.
Most DC-DC converters and some of the DRAM packages are cooled by the massive mounting frame. Those that aren't transfer heat directly to the sink through thermal pads.
When you remove the frame (to install a water-cooling block, for instance), you can use the aforementioned plate to offer some cooling relief to the DC-DC converters. It's not clear whether that's enough to maintain stability, or if you also need some active cooling across the card.
Side Views
On top of the card, there are the vertical cooling fins, the back-lit Lightning logo, and three auxiliary power connectors. Technically, two eight-pin plugs would have been enough for AMD's Hawaii GPU. We're getting ahead of ourselves, though...
The bottom view gives us a peek at how the heat pipes route from the heat sink's base to its cooling fins.
Because the fins are oriented vertically, looking in from the end of the card presents you with a limited view. Though, there are the three headers for the cooling fans.
Rear Panel
The I/O bracket is only two slots wide, even though the card occupies three expansion slots worth of space on your motherboard. Perhaps MSI should have gone all the way and used a three-slot bracket for additional bracing.
There's nothing new in the connector department. You get two dual-link DVI-D outputs, HDMI, and full-sized DisplayPort. We're happy to see vendors like MSI ditching VGA altogether.
This high-end board comes factory-overclocked to 1080 MHz, so its stock performance should exceed competing Radeon R9 290X boards (remember from Radeon R9 290X Review: AMD's Back In Ultra-High-End Gaming that reference-class cards run at up to 1 GHz). The question is whether that advantage translates to real-world performance.
First, let's have a look at the factory specifications of the seven Radeon R9 290X boards we've tested already:
| Models: | GPU Clock, in MHz | Memory Clock, in MHz | Memory Bandwidth (GB/s) | Pixel Fillrate (GPixel/s) | Texture Fillrate (GTexel/s) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Asus R9290X-DC2OC-4GD5 R9 290X DirectCU II OC | 1050 | 1350 | 345.6 | 67.2 | 184.8 |
| Sapphire Tri-X OC R9 290X | 1040 | 1300 | 332.8 | 66.6 | 183.0 |
| Gigabyte GV-R929XOC-4GD R9 290X Windforce OC | 1040 | 1250 | 320.0 | 66.6 | 183.0 |
| HIS R9 290X IceQ X² Turbo | 1060 | 1350 | 345.6 | 67.8 | 186.6 |
| MSI R9 290X Gaming 4G | 1040 | 1250 | 320 | 66.6 | 183 |
| MSI R9 290X Lightning | 1080 | 1250 | 320 | 69.1 | 190.1 |
| MSI R9 290X Lightning (Overclocked) | 1150 | 1350 | 345.6 | 73.6 | 202.4 |
GPU-Z Screen Shot
Manual Overclocking
Let’s start this section on a good note, with a stable overclocking profile we can use through our review, posted up next to the card's stock settings. Because we don't have access to voltage settings, there's not a ton of headroom available, unfortunately. Hitting 1158 MHz was all the board could muster after increasing the power target to 50%. Any higher and the card simply wasn't stable. At 1165 MHz, it'd last a few minutes; the card could only handle a load at 1200 MHz for a few seconds.
Hence, we set the GPU clock to 1150 MHz and increased the memory clock to 1350 MHz. While higher memory clocks are possible, they do not result in further performance increases.

Clock Rates under Load, With and Without Manual Overclocking
We saw clock throttling in both cases, but only briefly, and it didn't appear to affect measurable performance.

Increasing the power target allows the GPU to overclock beyond 1100 MHz, where it remains stable enough to use daily.

Test System and Benchmarks
We went with the latest Catalyst beta package and four carefully-selected benchmarks, run at the highest quality settings. The results are normalized, giving us a performance index in percentage points. AMD's reference Radeon R9 290 gives us our baseline at 100%.
| System | Intel Core i7-4930K (Ivy Bridge-E), Overclocked to 4 GHz Asus Rampage IV Black Edition, X79 Express 32 GB Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR3-2133 Enermax TLC 240 Closed-Loop Liquid Cooler 1 x SSD 512 GB Samsung 840 Pro |
|---|---|
| Power Supply | Corsair AX860i |
| Operating System | Windows 8.1 |
| Drivers | AMD Catalyst 14.2 Beta GeForce 334.89 |
| Benchmarks | Metro: Last Light BioShock Infinite Battlefield 4 (Single-Player) Crysis 3 (DX11) |
Performance Rating
In order to achieve realistic and comparable results, we heat up the cards prior to benchmarking, subjecting them to a 3D load that takes their GPU temperatures up to a steady state. This creates a level playing field for factory-overclocked cards.
In a nutshell, an overclocked MSI R9 290X Lightning cannot best Gigabyte's overclocked GeForce GTX 780 Ti Windforce OC, though the performance difference between both front-runners is quite small. Amazingly, two cards based on different manufacturers’ flagship GPUs treat us to a photo finish in this race.

Test System and Power Draw Measurement
We partnered up with HAMEG Instruments (Rohde & Schwarz) to implement a state-of-the-art test system for precise, short interval power and performance measurements.
Only modern lab instruments can keep up with the challenges that AMD’s Power Tune and Nvidia’s GPU Boost present (namely, huge swings in dynamic power consumption). We feed all relevant currents and voltages into a multi-channel 500 MHz oscilloscope (HAMEG HMO 3054), which can be remote-controlled and is able to retain the test data.

We measure the currents with three calibrated DC current clamp probes (HAMEG HZO50). Two of them, 3.3 and 12 V, take their readings at a custom-made riser card, which can reliably pass PCIe 3.0 signals, and one of them at a specially-modified PCIe power cable. All voltages are measured at the single-rail power supply, which we slightly modified to allow better access.

Our time resolution is now a mere 2 ms, which can measure and log all load transients incurred by AMD’s Power Tune and Nvidia’s GPU Boost. In order to keep the volume of data manageable, we limit the duration of a test run to two minutes.
| Test Method | No contact current measurement at the PCIe slot (Riser card) No contact current measurement at the external PCIe power cable Voltage measurement at the PSU |
|---|---|
| Test Equipment | 1 x HAMEG HMO 3054, 500 MHz four-channel oscilloscope 3 x HAMEG HZO50 current probe (1 mA - 30 A, 100 kHz, DC) 4 x HAMEG HZ355 (10:1 probe, 500 MHz) 1 x HAMEG HMC 8012 DSO |
| Test Bench | Microcool Banchetto 101 |
| Power Supply | Corsair AX860i with slightly modified connectors |
What Happens Within 100 ms?
A lot! We log the power draw with three probes at a 2 ms interval and pick a representative 100 ms window. Then we plot the resulting 50 data points in a graph.
Looking at the graph, you almost have to feel sorry for the power supply. Power draw through the PCIe power cables jumps from 140 to 352 W within a few milliseconds. You can't expect just any old generic PSU to cope with that. The two test points at the PCIe riser cards do not exhibit such drastic load changes.

We like that neither AMD nor Nvidia max out the PCIe slot connector's output rating, which is 75 W. Those auxiliary power cables bear the brunt of the load. Nor are there drastic load transients on the motherboard connector. All of this helps ensure system stability, benefiting multi-GPU setups in particular.
Now let's take a look at power consumption in real-world workloads.
Measuring the Power Draw
The following diagrams contain a text header, which is followed by the actual measurement curves. In that header, you'll find the average and peak power draw on all three rails, along with the sum of those averages, giving us the total average and peak power consumption.
Total peak wattage is not simply the sum of the three individual peaks, but rather the total peak wattage observed within the 120-second sample window. That makes more sense than adding the peak wattages together, since it's unlikely that all three max out at the same moment.
Power Consumption during Gaming, With and Without Overclocking
These diagrams employ a logarithmic scale. The thick red line represents average total power draw at a time resolution of six seconds.

When the card is overclocked from 1080 to 1150 MHz, an increase of 6.5 percent, graphics performance increases by approximately four percent. The power draw increases by a mere five percent, showing that Power Tune does a good job. Unfortunately, in order to increase this card's GPU voltage, you have to register with MSI for a special license. This isn't given out freely; only professional overclockers can get their hands on it.

Power Draw During Internet Surfing
People don’t spend all of their time gaming; typically, much more is spent browsing the Web. We simulate this workload with a static version of our home page, scrolling all the way down and back up again. While scrolling does make use of hardware acceleration, the power draw for that is quite benign.

Power Draw at Idle
Many people leave their PCs on all the time, making the power consumption of components at idle quite important. Measuring draw from the wall doesn't cut it if we want to isolate the graphics card, since there's no way to reliably factor out the rest of the platform.
Our state-of-the-art test equipment shows that this graphics card only draws 14.02 W at idle, which is less than our previous generation of lab instruments indicated:

We found one interesting detail. Sometimes, power consumption at the motherboard slot drops to zero, and sometimes power use through the auxiliary power cables does the same thing. Obviously, this never happens at the same time. However, the phenomenon still surprised us.
Temperature Transients
Is the cooling performance of this behemoth as strong as its size seems to promise? The answer is a resounding yes. It even has cooling headroom to spare.
We plot the temperature transients for both its factory-overclocked and manually-overclocked configurations. MSI's R9 290X Lightning reaches its maximum temperature of 70 °C (158 °F) and 71 °C (160 °F) overclocked after roughly nine minutes, and tops out there.

| Models | Idle | Gaming Load, Open Test Bench | VRM | Gaming Load, Closed Case |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Asus R9290X-DC2OC-4GD5 R9 290X DirectCU II OC | 34 °C | 76 °C | 92 °C | 84-85 °C |
| Sapphire Tri-X OC R9 290X | 35 °C | 73 °C | 85 °C | 70-72 °C |
| Gigabyte GV-R929XOC-4GD R9 290X Windforce OC Press Sample: | 34 °C | 84 °C | 86 °C | 83 °C |
| Gigabyte GV-R929XOC-4GD R9 290X Windforce OC Mass Production: | 34 °C | 83 °C | 87 °C | 81 °C |
| HIS R9 290X IceQ X² Turbo | 35 °C | 78 °C | 70 °C | 81-82 °C |
| MSI R9 290X Gaming 4G | 34 °C | 76 °C | 73 °C | 75-76 °C |
| MSI R9 290X Lightning: | 35 °C | 70 °C | 80 °C | 68-70 °C |
| MSI R9 290X Lightning, Overclocked | 35 °C | 71 °C | 82 °C | 68-71 °C |
Previously, Sapphire enjoyed the distinction of turning in the lowest temperatures of any other Radeon R9 290X card. But MSI's R9 290X Lightning de-thrones the Tri-X OC board with even more effective cooling.
Sound Level
We first measure each graphics card's noise level in different workloads using the same studio microphone and calibration seen in our audio reviews. The microphone is positioned perpendicular to the middle of the graphics card at a distance of 50 cm.
Does the R9 290X Lightning achieve its excellent cooling performance at the cost of more noise, like so many other products that fail to balance thermals and acoustics well? To the contrary, MSI surprises us again by building the quietest Radeon R9 290X we've ever tested, too.
| Models | Idle | Gaming Load, Open Test Bench | Gaming Load, Closed Case |
|---|---|---|---|
| Asus R9290X-DC2OC-4GD5 R9 290X DirectCU II OC | 32.5 dB(A) | 42.3 dB(A) | 44.3 dB(A) |
| Sapphire Tri-X OC R9 290X | 32.1 dB(A) | 40.9 dB(A) | 42.8 dB(A) |
| Gigabyte GV-R929XOC-4GD R9 290X Windforce OC Press Sample: | 30.9 dB(A) | 41.5 dB(A) | 43.6 dB(A) |
| Gigabyte GV-R929XOC-4GD R9 290X Windforce OC Mass Production: | 30.9 dB(A) | 39.6 dB(A) | 43.2 dB(A) |
| HIS R9 290X IceQ X² Turbo | 31.2 dB(A) | 46.2 dB(A) | 48.8 dB(A) |
| MSI R9 290X Gaming 4G | 30.9 dB(A) | 41.2 dB(A) | 43.9 dB(A) |
| MSI R9 290X Lightning: | 31.1 dB(A) | 38.5 dB(A) | 42.2 dB(A) |
| MSI R9 290X Lightning, Overclocked | 31.1 dB(A) | 39.2 dB(A) | 43.8 dB(A) |
With that said, the sound levels are fairly close, so we encourage you to watch the videos and compare them yourself. After all, the spectral composition of the fan noise may differ from card to card, and personal preferences may vary as well.
MSI R9 290X Lightning
Sapphire Tri-X OC R9 290X
This hefty piece of hardware delivers convincing cooling performance, aided by three quiet fans, minimal DC-DC converter chirping, and power consumption we'd consider reasonable in light of the flagship-class performance it offers.
As of this writing, the R9 290X Lightning is in-stock at Newegg and selling for $700. That ties it as the most expensive Radeon R9 290X-derived card out there. We love the thermals. We love the acoustics, but you'll have to decide if those are worth paying significantly extra for. Just don't settle for a reference-class board. The Radeon R9 290X really needs third-party cooling.
MSI R9 290X Lightning
MSI's R9 290X Lightning is also as expensive most factory-overclocked GeForce GTX 780 Tis. The performance difference between tuned R9 290X and GTX 780 Ti is fairly small. Given a choice between them, the favorite really comes down to user preference. Will you be mining Litecoins? Do you need ShadowPlay support? Is Mantle an important consideration for you? How about G-Sync? Each vendor has its own proprietary advantages.
Our German team published this review first. Over in Europe, pricing is quite a bit different. Energy costs a lot more. Cryptocurrency mining isn't as viable in as many places. And so the prices on high-end Radeon boards aren't as inflated. Given a very competitive position against Nvidia's boards, they gave MSI's R9 290X Lightning the equivalent of our Smart Buy award.
We reserve that honor for a product that demonstrates value. And at least in the U.S., there are plenty of GeForce GTX 780 Ti cards priced at $700, and Radeon R9 290X cards under $600. Enthusiasts needs to decide if $700 for the Lightning is worth paying, but we simply can't call out the same value story here.
If you do spring for the R9 290X Lightning, take care to brace and support it. The card's cooler is massive, and it might present a challenge to ship in a built-up PC.
Conclusion
MSI deserves credit for taking a GPU that began its life as a hot, unpredictable performer and turning its image around. The R9 290X Lightning comes armed with the cooling necessary to keep AMD's Hawaii GPU at a consistent clock rate, and it does its job quietly.
Really, our only issue with the card is its price, which tops the charts amongst Radeon R9 290X boards and exceeds most of the GeForce GTX 780 Ti models as well. PowerColor's PCS+ AXR9 290X, which is also quite compelling, sells for $600. As competing 290Xes come down in price, we hope MSI adjusts what it charges for the Lightning. After all, aside from exhausting all of its waste heat back into your chassis, the card comes close to perfection.

















