NVIDIA
GeForce GT 130 vs Radeon R9 290
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
AMD
R9 290
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GT 130 and R9 290 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗GT 130 outperforms R9 290 by ~3% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+3%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 32Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: GeForce GT 130 (~24%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider GT 130
- Higher catalog performance index
- Lower stated power consumption
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.1 · Not supported
Reasons to consider R9 290
- More graphics memory
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 2.1 · Not supported
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
NVIDIA
AMDPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3938
10046
100100
1356
Graphics card ranking
Positions 220–225of 321
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
GeForce GT 130
168 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
39Better
38
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
34
34
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
32Better
31
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100Better
46
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
57Better
46
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
Device class
Max monitors
Max resolution
USB Type-C
Recommended PSU
Length
Power consumptionBetter
DirectX
OpenGL
TFLOPSBetter
Memory type
Power connector
Release date
Architecture
Thickness
Compute API
Launch priceBetter
Clock speedBetter
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
VRAMBetter
Memory frequencyBetter
Memory busBetter
Memory bandwidthBetter
Interface
Power consumptionBetter
Process nodeBetter
Die sizeBetter
Transistor countBetter
Shader units / coresBetter
Memory cacheBetter
Vulkan
Upscaling
DisplayPort
HDMI
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares GT 130 and R9 290 across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
GT 130R9 290
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
195 FPS
184 FPS
1080p Ultra
137 FPS
130 FPS
1440p Ultra
77 FPS
80 FPS
4K Ultra
28 FPS
28 FPS
Counter-Strike 2GT 130195 FPSR9 290184 FPSGT 130137 FPSR9 290130 FPSGT 13077 FPSR9 29080 FPSGT 13028 FPSR9 29028 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077GT 130126 FPSR9 290119 FPSGT 130108 FPSR9 290102 FPSGT 13055 FPSR9 29058 FPSGT 13019 FPSR9 29019 FPS
Forza Horizon 5GT 130158 FPSR9 290150 FPSGT 130103 FPSR9 29097 FPSGT 13069 FPSR9 29072 FPSGT 13041 FPSR9 29041 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyGT 130103 FPSR9 29097 FPSGT 13086 FPSR9 29081 FPSGT 13050 FPSR9 29052 FPSGT 13019 FPSR9 29019 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 10039383%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100324022%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100324329%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 1001356125%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1001004674%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 100274652%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100284547%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100324329%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 100244867%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100314332%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX10.012.0
VulkanNot supported1.2
OpenGL3.34.6
UpscalingNot supportedNot supported
Compute APIOpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.1OpenCL 2.1
Architecture and release
ArchitectureTeslaGCN 2.0
Process node55 nm28 nmBetter
Release date20092013
Device classDesktopDesktop
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count314 million6200 millionBetter
Die size121 mm²Better438 mm²
Shader units / cores322816Better
Base clock500 MHz947 MHzBetter
Boost clock500 MHz947 MHzBetter
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 2x16PCIe 3x16
LengthVaries by boardVaries by board
ThicknessMXM ModuleTriple-slot
Recommended PSUVaries by board950 W
Power connector6 pin6+8 pin
Display outputs and limits
HDMIBoard dependentHDMI 1.4a
DisplayPortBoard dependentDisplayPort 1.2
USB Type-CNoNo
Max monitorsVaries by board4
Max resolutionVaries by board4096 × 2160
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM512 MB DDR2Better4 GB GDDR5
Memory typeDDR2GDDR5
Memory bus192 bit512 bitBetter
TFLOPS0.0965.632Better
Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 32
- Specifications
- 0 / 70
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (4)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (5)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
- · Record changed: product_prices
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: GT 130 or R9 290?+
GT 130 has the higher overall gaming score, while GT 130 offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
GT 130 is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
GT 130 is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
GT 130 offers more overall performance, while GT 130 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
GT 130 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
GT 130 is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
GT 130 leads in combined 1440p performance. GT 130 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
GT 130 is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
GT 130 is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
GT 130 is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to GT 130 if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.