ATI Radeon 7500 vs R9 290X

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 290X and Radeon 7500, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 290X
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
18.58
+185700%

R9 290X outperforms ATI 7500 by a whopping 185700% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking2931526
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.74no data
Power efficiency4.590.03
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Rage 7 (2001−2006)
GPU code nameHawaiiRV200
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date24 October 2013 (11 years ago)14 August 2001 (23 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$549 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 cores2816no data
Core clock speedno data290 MHz
Boost clock speed947 MHzno data
Number of transistors6,200 million60 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rate176.01.740
Floating-point processing power5.632 TFLOPSno data
ROPs642
TMUs1766

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16AGP 4x
Length275 mmno data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin + 1 x 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 typeGDDR5DDR
Maximum RAM amount4 GB64 MB
Memory bus width512 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz230 MHz
Memory bandwidth320 GB/s7.36 GB/s
Shared memory-no 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 DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAcceleration+-
CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 127.0
Shader Model6.3no data
OpenGL4.61.3
OpenCL2.0N/A
Vulkan+N/A

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 290X 18.58
+185700%
ATI 7500 0.01

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 290X 7425
+247400%
ATI 7500 3

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 HD85-0−1
4K52-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.46no data
4K10.56no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 35−40 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 35−40 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 80−85 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 50−55 0−1
Metro Exodus 50−55 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50 0−1
Valorant 75−80 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 35−40 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40 0−1
Dota 2 45 0−1
Far Cry 5 65−70 0−1
Fortnite 100−110 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 80−85 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 50−55 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 67 0−1
Metro Exodus 50−55 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60−65 0−1
Valorant 75−80 0−1
World of Tanks 280 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 35−40 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40 0−1
Dota 2 136 0−1
Far Cry 5 65−70 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 80−85 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 50−55 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140 0−1
Valorant 75−80 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 30−33 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18 0−1
World of Tanks 130−140 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 16−18 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16 0−1
Far Cry 5 50−55 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 50−55 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 30−35 0−1
Metro Exodus 40−45 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30 0−1
Valorant 50−55 0−1

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 18−20 0−1
Dota 2 52 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 52 0−1
Metro Exodus 14−16 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 52 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 18−20 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 0−1
Dota 2 84 0−1
Far Cry 5 24−27 0−1
Fortnite 21−24 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 27−30 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 16−18 0−1
Valorant 21−24 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 18.58 0.01
Recency 24 October 2013 14 August 2001
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 64 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 150 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 23 Watt

R9 290X has a 185700% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 435.7% more advanced lithography process.

ATI 7500, on the other hand, has 987% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 290X is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 7500 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 290X
Radeon R9 290X
ATI Radeon 7500
Radeon 7500

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.


4.1 456 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 46 votes

Rate Radeon 7500 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.