Radeon RX 6650M vs R9 290

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 290 with Radeon RX 6650M, including specs and performance data.

R9 290
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 275 Watt
20.97

RX 6650M outperforms R9 290 by an impressive 86% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking257112
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation7.89no data
Power efficiency5.4523.25
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameHawaiiNavi 23
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date5 November 2013 (10 years ago)4 January 2022 (2 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 cores25601792
Core clock speed947 MHz2068 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2416 MHz
Number of transistors6,200 million11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)275 Watt120 Watt
Texture fill rate151.5270.6
Floating-point processing power4.849 TFLOPS8.659 TFLOPS
ROPs6464
TMUs160112
Ray Tracing Coresno data28

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 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length275 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB8 GB
Memory bus width512 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth320.0 GB/s256.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.36.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.3

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 20.97
RX 6650M 39.06
+86.3%

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
RX 6650M 15074
+86.3%

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 290 11860
RX 6650M 25739
+117%

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 HD60−65
−102%
121
+102%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 127
+0%
127
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Battlefield 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 106
+0%
106
+0%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Hitman 3 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Metro Exodus 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Battlefield 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 79
+0%
79
+0%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Hitman 3 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Metro Exodus 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 190
+0%
190
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 64
+0%
64
+0%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Hitman 3 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 167
+0%
167
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 90
+0%
90
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 62
+0%
62
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Hitman 3 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Metro Exodus 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Hitman 3 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

This is how R9 290 and RX 6650M compete in popular games:

  • RX 6650M is 102% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 20.97 39.06
Recency 5 November 2013 4 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 275 Watt 120 Watt

RX 6650M has a 86.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 129.2% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6650M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 290 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 290 is a desktop card while Radeon RX 6650M is a notebook 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
AMD Radeon RX 6650M
Radeon RX 6650M

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.


4.2 546 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 93 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6650M 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.