Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire vs R9 285

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 285 with Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire, including specs and performance data.

R9 285
2014, $249
2 GB GDDR5, 190 Watt
15.97

R9 M290X Crossfire outperforms R9 285 by a small 8% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking368351
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation7.68no data
Power efficiency6.476.61
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)GCN (2012−2015)
GPU code nameTongaNeptune CF
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date2 September 2014 (11 years ago)1 March 2014 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$249 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores17922560
Core clock speed918 MHz850 MHz
Boost clock speedno data900 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million2x 2800 Million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)190 Watt200 Watt
Texture fill rate102.8no data
Floating-point processing power3.29 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs112no data
L1 Cache448 KBno data
L2 Cache512 KBno data

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length221 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinno data

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2x 4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit2x 256 Bit
Memory clock speed1375 MHz4800 MHz
Memory bandwidth176.0 GB/sno data
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2no data
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (FL 11_1)
Shader Model6.5no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.1no data
Vulkan1.2.170-

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

R9 285 15.97
R9 M290X Crossfire 17.18
+7.6%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

R9 285 8570
R9 M290X Crossfire 10551
+23.1%

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 HD55−60
−12.7%
62
+12.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.53no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Dota 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Dota 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Dota 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

This is how R9 285 and R9 M290X Crossfire compete in popular games:

  • R9 M290X Crossfire is 13% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.97 17.18
Recency 2 September 2014 1 March 2014
Power consumption (TDP) 190 Watt 200 Watt

R9 285 has an age advantage of 6 months, and 5% lower power consumption.

R9 M290X Crossfire, on the other hand, has a 8% higher aggregate performance score.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon R9 285 and Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire.

Be aware that Radeon R9 285 is a desktop graphics card while Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire is a notebook one.

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.


4.2 80 votes

Rate Radeon R9 285 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 11 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 285 or Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.