AMD
Radeon R7 240 vs Radeon R9 290
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
AMD
R9 290
Aggregate performance score
We've compared R7 240 and R9 290 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗R9 290 outperforms R7 240 by ~23% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+23%
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: Radeon R7 240 (~13%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider R7 240
- Lower stated power consumption
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 1.2 · Not supported
Reasons to consider R9 290
- Higher catalog performance index
- 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.
AMDPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3138
10046
100100
4356
Graphics card ranking
Positions 155–160of 321
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
Radeon R9 290
153 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Radeon R7 240
Price $27.00Based on catalog performance per unit of current market price, not measured FPS.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
31
38Better
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
29
34Better
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
26
31Better
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100Better
46
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
52Better
46
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
Power connector
Release date
HDMI
Device class
Max monitors
Max resolution
USB Type-C
DirectX
Vulkan
OpenGL
TFLOPSBetter
Power consumptionBetter
Memory type
ArchitectureBetter
Thickness
Compute API
Launch priceBetter
Shader units / coresBetter
Clock speedBetter
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
VRAMBetter
Memory frequencyBetter
Memory busBetter
Memory bandwidthBetter
Interface
Power consumptionBetter
Process node
Recommended PSUBetter
Length
Die sizeBetter
Memory cache
Transistor countBetter
DisplayPort
Upscaling
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares R7 240 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.
R7 240R9 290
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
155 FPS
184 FPS
1080p Ultra
109 FPS
130 FPS
1440p Ultra
59 FPS
80 FPS
4K Ultra
21 FPS
28 FPS
Counter-Strike 2R7 240155 FPSR9 290184 FPSR7 240109 FPSR9 290130 FPSR7 24059 FPSR9 29080 FPSR7 24021 FPSR9 29028 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077R7 240100 FPSR9 290119 FPSR7 24086 FPSR9 290102 FPSR7 24043 FPSR9 29058 FPSR7 24014 FPSR9 29019 FPS
Forza Horizon 5R7 240126 FPSR9 290150 FPSR7 24082 FPSR9 29097 FPSR7 24053 FPSR9 29072 FPSR7 24031 FPSR9 29041 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyR7 24082 FPSR9 29097 FPSR7 24068 FPSR9 29081 FPSR7 24038 FPSR9 29052 FPSR7 24014 FPSR9 29019 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100313820%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100324022%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100344323%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 100435626%
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 / 100364624%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100364522%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100344323%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 100384823%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100354321%
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
DirectX11.112.0
Vulkan1.21.2
OpenGL4.64.6
UpscalingNot supportedNot supported
Compute APIOpenCL 1.2OpenCL 2.1
Architecture and release
ArchitectureGCN 1.0GCN 2.0Better
Process node28 nm28 nm
Release date20132013
Device classDesktopDesktop
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count950 million6200 millionBetter
Die size77 mm²Better438 mm²
Shader units / cores3202816Better
Base clock780 MHz947 MHzBetter
Boost clock780 MHz947 MHzBetter
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 3x8PCIe 3x16
Length168 mmVaries by board
ThicknessSingle-slotTriple-slot
Recommended PSU200 WBetter950 W
Power connectorNone6+8 pin
Display outputs and limits
HDMIHDMI 1.4aHDMI 1.4a
DisplayPortBoard dependentDisplayPort 1.2
USB Type-CNoNo
Max monitors34
Max resolution4096 × 21604096 × 2160
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM2 GB GDDR34 GB GDDR5Better
Memory typeGDDR3GDDR5
Memory bus128 bit512 bitBetter
TFLOPS0.4485.632Better
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 (6)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
- · Record changed: product_prices
- · 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: R7 240 or R9 290?+
R7 240 has the higher overall gaming score, while R7 240 offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
R7 240 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?+
R7 240 is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
R7 240 offers more overall performance, while R7 240 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
R7 240 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
R7 240 is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
R7 240 leads in combined 1440p performance. R7 240 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
R7 240 is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
R7 240 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?+
R7 240 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 R7 240 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.