Iris Plus Graphics vs Radeon R9 290

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 290 and Iris Plus Graphics, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 290
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 275 Watt
20.98
+346%

R9 290 outperforms Iris Plus Graphics by a whopping 346% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking259646
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation7.90no data
Power efficiency5.3221.84
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Generation 11.0 (2019−2021)
GPU code nameHawaiiIce Lake GT2
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date5 November 2013 (11 years ago)no data (2024 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$399 no data

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 cores2560512
Core clock speed947 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data1000 MHz
Number of transistors6,200 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)275 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate151.532.00
Floating-point processing power4.849 TFLOPS1.024 TFLOPS
ROPs648
TMUs16032

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x1
Length275 mmno data
Width2-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width512 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1250 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth320.0 GB/sno data

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.3no data
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.0no data
Vulkan1.2.131-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

R9 290 20.98
+346%
Iris Plus Graphics 4.70

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

R9 290 8093
+346%
Iris Plus Graphics 1814

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 20.98 4.70
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 275 Watt 15 Watt

R9 290 has a 346.4% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Plus Graphics, on the other hand, has a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 1733.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 290 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Plus Graphics in performance tests.


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 290
Radeon R9 290
Intel Iris Plus Graphics
Iris Plus Graphics

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.


4.2 552 votes

Rate Radeon R9 290 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 361 vote

Rate Iris Plus Graphics 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.