• Review

AMD Radeon R9 290 Review: Fast And $400, But Is It Consistent?

by
169 Comments

Test Setup And Benchmarks

Because Radeon R9 290X can be so bipolar, it’s important to spell out how we’re testing all of these cards today.

Typically, we run benchmarks in rapid succession. This means that the GPU remains warm after its first run. This matters very little to cards that operate at one clock rate. But it makes more of a difference on boards with Nvidia’s GPU Boost technology, which won’t stretch up as high when certain limits are exceeded. AMD’s clocking mechanism is even more sensitive to thermal and power conditions, necessitating an even more regimented approach to testing.

For every test we run, we spend five minutes in-game, playing, before launching our benchmark sequence. In a metric like Metro: Last Light, where we use a benchmark tool, we run multiple iterations prior to starting the measurement.

In this way, we’re sure the card is at its maximum operating temperature, yielding the lowest benchmark results, but best representing the experience you’d get from these cards after just a few minutes of playing your favorite title.

We’re also changing up the benchmarking a bit. In preparation for today’s piece, we re-ran every single test. We standardized settings across resolutions to better track scaling, and, again, we’re subjecting every board to five minutes of in-game time before firing up our testing sequence. As a result, we're presenting slightly different numbers from our 290X review, but the data should be more precise, too.

Test Hardware And Software

Test Hardware
Processors
Intel Core i7-3970X (Sandy Bridge-E) 3.5 GHz Base Clock Rate, Overclocked to 4.3 GHz, LGA 2011, 15 MB Shared L3, Hyper-Threading enabled, Power-savings enabled
Motherboard
MSI X79A-GD45 Plus (LGA 2011) X79 Express Chipset, BIOS 17.5
Memory
G.Skill 32 GB (8 x 4 GB) DDR3-2133, F3-17000CL9Q-16GBXM x2 @ 9-11-10-28 and 1.65 V
Hard Drive
Samsung 840 Pro SSD 256 GB SATA 6Gb/s
Graphics
AMD Radeon R9 290 4 GB

AMD Radeon R9 290X 4 GB

AMD Radeon R9 280X 3 GB

AMD Radeon HD 7990 6 GB

Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan 6 GB

Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 3 GB

Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 4 GB
Power Supply
Corsair AX860i 860 W
System Software And Drivers
Operating System
Windows 8 Professional 64-bit
DirectX
DirectX 11
Graphics DriverAMD Catalyst 13.11 Beta 8 (Radeon R9 290)

AMD Catalyst 13.11 Beta 7 (All Other AMD cards)

Nvidia GeForce 331.65 Beta (All Nvidia cards)
Benchmarks And Settings
Battlefield 4
1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160: Ultra Quality Preset, v-sync off, 100-second Tashgar playback. FCAT for 1920x1080 and 2560x1440; Fraps for 3840x2160
Arma III
1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160: Ultra Quality Preset, 8x FSAA, Anisotropic Filtering: Ultra, v-sync off, Infantry Showcase, 30-second playback, FCAT and Fraps
Metro: Last Light
1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160: Very High Quality Preset, 16x Anisotropic Filtering, Low Motion Blur, v-sync off, Built-In Benchmark, FCAT and Fraps
The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160: Ultra Quality Preset, FXAA Disabled, 25-second Custom Run-Through, FCAT and Fraps
BioShock Infinite
1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160: Very High Quality Preset, 75-second Opening Game Sequence, FCAT and Fraps
Crysis 3
1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160: High System Spec, High Texture Resolution, MSAA Low (2X), 60-second Custom Run-Through, FCAT and Fraps
Tomb Raider
1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160: Ultimate Quality Preset, FXAA, 16x Anisotropic Filtering, TressFX Hair, 45-second Custom Run-Through, FCAT and Fraps
Previous Next
Summary
  1. Digging Deeper Into Hawaii’s Behavior
  2. Sidebar: Variability Turns Into A Graphics Card Crapshoot
  3. Meet The Radeon R9 290
  4. Test Setup And Benchmarks
  5. Results: Arma III
  6. Results: Battlefield 4
  7. Results: BioShock Infinite
  8. Results: Crysis 3
  9. Results: Metro: Last Light
  10. Results: The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
  11. Results: Tomb Raider
  12. Results (DirectX): AutoCAD 2013 And Inventor
  13. Results (OpenGL): LightWave And Maya 2013
  14. Results (OpenCL): GPGPU Benchmarks
  15. Gaming Power Consumption Details
  16. Detailed Gaming Efficiency Results
  17. Power Consumption Overview
  18. Noise And Video Comparison
  19. Do-It-Yourself Upgrade With Arctic's Accelero Xtreme III
  20. Radeon R9 290: Priced Right Where We’d Peg It
About the author
Chris Angelini & Igor Wallossek

Chris Angelini is an Editor Emeritus at Tom's Hardware US. He edits hardware reviews and covers high-profile CPU and GPU launches.

Read more
Create a new thread in the US Reviews comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
169 comments
Comment from the forums
    Your comment
    Top Comments
  • Shankovich
    Wow a 12% boost with non-reference coolers. Can you imagine what'll happen with the 290X when we see that? Thanks AMD! Some much needed competition!
  • slomo4sho
    This is a win at $400! Good job AMD!



    http://techreport.com/review/25602/amd-radeon-r9-290-graphics-card-reviewed/9

    Anonymous said:
    However, the two retail Radeon R9 290X boards in our lab are both slower than the 290 tested today. They average lower clock rates over time, pushing frame rates down. Clearly there’s something wrong when the derivative card straight from AMD ends up on top of the just-purchased flagships. So who’s to say that retail 290s won’t follow suit, and when we start buying those cards, they prove to underperform GeForce GTX 780? We can only speculate at this point, though anecdotal evidence gleaned from our experience with R9 290X is suggestive.


    Chris, these results differ drastically from real world results from 290X owners at OCN... I understand that your observations are anecdotal and based on a very small sample size but do you mind looking into this matter further because putting such a statement in bold in the conclusion even though it contradicts real world experiences of owners just provides a false assumption to the uninformed reader...

    The above claim has already escalated further than it should... A Swiss site actually has already rebutted by testing their own press sample with a retail model and concluded the following:

    Quote:
    With the results in hand, the picture is clear. The performance is basically identical between the press copy and graphics card from the shelf, at least in Uber mode. Any single frame per second is different, which is what may be considered normal as bonds or uncertainty in the measurements.

    In the quiet mode, where the dynamic frequencies to work overtime, the situation becomes slightly turbid. A minor performance difference can be seen in some titles, and even if it is not about considerable variations, the trend is clear. In the end, it does an average variance tion of only a few percent, ie no extreme levels. The reason may include slightly less contact with the cooler, or simply easy changing ambient temperature.
  • gity69
    Well as a long time AMD fan this is both great news and cause for concern. That disparity between retail and press cards is disturbing to say the least. I am also curious if a proper cooling solution would rectify that problem. As to why I like AMD well much like their CPU's the Hawaii line looks to be power hungry and hot but will shine if power is not a concern and pampered by someone who knows what their doing. I'm looking forward to what I can do with one of these with a proper water cooling setup.
    • Other Comments
  • slomo4sho
    This is a win at $400! Good job AMD!



    http://techreport.com/review/25602/amd-radeon-r9-290-graphics-card-reviewed/9

    Anonymous said:
    However, the two retail Radeon R9 290X boards in our lab are both slower than the 290 tested today. They average lower clock rates over time, pushing frame rates down. Clearly there’s something wrong when the derivative card straight from AMD ends up on top of the just-purchased flagships. So who’s to say that retail 290s won’t follow suit, and when we start buying those cards, they prove to underperform GeForce GTX 780? We can only speculate at this point, though anecdotal evidence gleaned from our experience with R9 290X is suggestive.


    Chris, these results differ drastically from real world results from 290X owners at OCN... I understand that your observations are anecdotal and based on a very small sample size but do you mind looking into this matter further because putting such a statement in bold in the conclusion even though it contradicts real world experiences of owners just provides a false assumption to the uninformed reader...

    The above claim has already escalated further than it should... A Swiss site actually has already rebutted by testing their own press sample with a retail model and concluded the following:

    Quote:
    With the results in hand, the picture is clear. The performance is basically identical between the press copy and graphics card from the shelf, at least in Uber mode. Any single frame per second is different, which is what may be considered normal as bonds or uncertainty in the measurements.

    In the quiet mode, where the dynamic frequencies to work overtime, the situation becomes slightly turbid. A minor performance difference can be seen in some titles, and even if it is not about considerable variations, the trend is clear. In the end, it does an average variance tion of only a few percent, ie no extreme levels. The reason may include slightly less contact with the cooler, or simply easy changing ambient temperature.
  • Heironious
    This is weird, something must be wrong with your system. I have an i5-2500, GTX 780, 16 GB G Skill 1333, 500 GB samsung SSD, Windows 8.1 64 bit, and on Ultra with 4x MSAA I get 80 - 100 FPS....
  • Heironious
    And thats on Multiplayer 64 man servers....
  • cangelini
    This is the single-player campaign.
  • aznjoka
    According to Tom's Benchmarks Nvidia's price drop just became meaningless
  • Heironious
    Multiplayer would add more stress to the CPUs / GPU's. Like I said, something is wrong with their machine. I would prob get higher on single player. Im going to check and find out.
  • DBGT_87
    hope we will not wait so long for the custom cards
  • slomo4sho
    Anonymous said:
    According to Tom's Benchmarks Nvidia's price drop just became meaningless


    Now to wait for the non-reference cards at the end of the month!
  • jimmysmitty
    I agree that the stock cooling is pretty bad but in honesty, no matter how nice they make it after market is always better. The Titan may not have had after market but if it did it would have cooled better.

    It looks like a good card for the price as it even keeps up with the $100 more GTX780. This is good as NVidia may drop prices even more which means we could also see a price drop on the 290X and I wouldn't mind a new 290X Toxic for sub $500.
  • guvnaguy
    In terms of potential performance it seems like a great card, but you get what you pay for with regards to chip quality and cooling.

    Best to wait a month or two before buying to see how this all goes down
  • Shankovich
    Wow a 12% boost with non-reference coolers. Can you imagine what'll happen with the 290X when we see that? Thanks AMD! Some much needed competition!
  • Raheel Hasan
    Great price but its performance is so close to 290x (~5%) that 290x is not making any sense at $550
  • rmpumper
    Anonymous said:
    According to Tom's Benchmarks Nvidia's price drop just became meaningless


    Some people who need CUDA for work and GPU for gaming will still get 780s, but no one will get 290x for $150 premium just to get a couple more FPS over 290. AMD just shot themselves in the foot before hurting nvidia.
  • MANOFKRYPTONAK
    It would be awesome if the 780 would drop to 400, or sub 400. 780ti for 550 to beat the 290x price. And then 299x vs 790x, I'm in heaven now :)
  • Anonymous
    If the AIBs can address the noise and heat (assuming sufficient channel quantities), AMD has a nice cash-cow.
  • crisan_tiberiu
    The cooler is one of the reasons that the card is cheaper than the competition. Why invest so much on a reference cooler when every guy who goes "ultimate hardware" wont use it anyway? The high end cards have a nieche consumer target who will go 3rd part coolers and watter...
    Nvidia made a very good job with the reference cooler(but you really pay for it)... do you think AMD could not have pulled of a "monster" cooler?? is it really hard to make a good cooler? no, it is expensive.
  • crisan_tiberiu
    BTW, you guys @ Tom's, make a call to Nvidia and ask them: "guys, how much does the cooler on the GTX 780 cost?" after that, make the call to AMD and ask the same question about the cooler on the R9 290/290x.
    You could do this, you have youre sources :)
  • m32
    Most of us were expecting $450! With $400 AMD is leaving a little meat on the bone for when we custom coolers. Personally, and I only speak for me, I'll take this card with it's heat, noise, performance and etc for $400.

    Strange thing and I know some of us were going through this. I was thinking getting a 280x on Black Friday/Cyber Monday but the price tag is leaving me with something to think about. I think I'm just going to save up the few pennies to get something I thought was out of my price range ($300-450) a month ago ($650+).
  • gity69
    Well as a long time AMD fan this is both great news and cause for concern. That disparity between retail and press cards is disturbing to say the least. I am also curious if a proper cooling solution would rectify that problem. As to why I like AMD well much like their CPU's the Hawaii line looks to be power hungry and hot but will shine if power is not a concern and pampered by someone who knows what their doing. I'm looking forward to what I can do with one of these with a proper water cooling setup.
  • Relayer
    Where did you get that retail sample? From nVidia? LOL
Display more comments
Most Popular
  1. Seven Radeon R9 280X Graphics Cards, Rounded-Up
  2. Nvidia Drops Prices of GTX 770 & 780; 780 Ti Price Revealed
  3. First Official AMD Radeon R9 290X Benchmarks
The Latest On Tom's Hardware
Edition
Subscribe to our newsletter
Company
Resources
Other Purch sites
  • © 2018 Purch All Rights Reserved.