GeForce FX 5900 Ultra vs Radeon R9 390 X2

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated1444
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data0.13
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Rankine (2003−2005)
GPU code nameGrenadaNV35
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date3 September 2015 (9 years ago)23 October 2003 (21 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,399 $499

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 speed1000 MHz450 MHz
Number of transistors6,200 million135 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)580 Watt59 Watt
Texture fill rate160.03.600
Floating-point processing power5.12 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
Lengthno data218 mm
Width3-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors4x 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 amount8 GB256 MB
Memory bus width512 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1350 MHz425 MHz
Memory bandwidth345.6 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 DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x VGA, 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 3 September 2015 23 October 2003
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 580 Watt 59 Watt

R9 390 X2 has an age advantage of 11 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 364.3% more advanced lithography process.

FX 5900 Ultra, on the other hand, has 883.1% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R9 390 X2 and GeForce FX 5900 Ultra. We've got no test results to judge.


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 390 X2
Radeon R9 390 X2
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5900 Ultra
GeForce FX 5900 Ultra

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.


3 32 votes

Rate Radeon R9 390 X2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 6 votes

Rate GeForce FX 5900 Ultra 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.