Quadro FX 3000G vs Radeon R9 290

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking259not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation7.90no data
Power efficiency5.32no data
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Rankine (2003−2005)
GPU code nameHawaiiNV35
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date5 November 2013 (11 years ago)22 July 2003 (21 year 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 cores2560no data
Core clock speed947 MHz400 MHz
Number of transistors6,200 million135 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)275 Wattno data
Texture fill rate151.53.200
Floating-point processing power4.849 TFLOPSno data
ROPs644
TMUs1608

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 x16AGP 8x
Length275 mmno data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin1x Molex

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 typeGDDR5DDR
Maximum RAM amount4 GB256 MB
Memory bus width512 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz425 MHz
Memory bandwidth320.0 GB/s27.2 GB/s

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 DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x S-Video
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)9.0a
Shader Model6.3no data
OpenGL4.61.5 (2.1)
OpenCL2.0N/A
Vulkan1.2.131N/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 5 November 2013 22 July 2003
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 130 nm

R9 290 has an age advantage of 10 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 364.3% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R9 290 and Quadro FX 3000G. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon R9 290 is a desktop card while Quadro FX 3000G is a workstation one.


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
NVIDIA Quadro FX 3000G
Quadro FX 3000G

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

No user ratings yet.

Rate Quadro FX 3000G 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.