
Radeon R9 290 / 390 vs Quadro K6000

Radeon R9 290 / 390
Popular choices:

Quadro K6000
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K6000
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R9 290 / 390 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro K6000 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Radeon R9 290 / 390 | Quadro K6000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+200%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (275mm) | Standard Size (265mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R9 290 / 390 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R9 290 / 390 holds the technical lead. Priced at $65 (vs $300), it costs 78% less, resulting in a 370.6% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon R9 290 / 390 | Quadro K6000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+370.6%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($65) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($300) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Radeon R9 290 / 390 and Quadro K6000

Radeon R9 290 / 390
The Radeon R9 290 / 390 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 18 2015. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1000 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 300W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,150 points. Launch price was $329.

Quadro K6000
The Quadro K6000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 23 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 797 MHz to 902 MHz. It has 2880 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,993 points. Launch price was $5,265.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R9 290 / 390 scores 8,150 and the Quadro K6000 reaches 7,993 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R9 290 / 390 is built on GCN 2.0 while the Quadro K6000 uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 2,560 (Radeon R9 290 / 390) vs 2,880 (Quadro K6000). Raw compute: 5.12 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 290 / 390) vs 5.196 TFLOPS (Quadro K6000). Boost clocks: 1000 MHz vs 902 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon R9 290 / 390 | Quadro K6000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 8,150+2% | 7,993 |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | Kepler |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2560 | 2880+13% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 5.12 TFLOPS | 5.196 TFLOPS+1% |
| Boost Clock | 1000 MHz+11% | 902 MHz |
| ROPs | 64+33% | 48 |
| TMUs | 160 | 240+50% |
| L1 Cache | 640 KB+167% | 240 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1.5 MB+50% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R9 290 / 390 | Quadro K6000 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Radeon R9 290 / 390 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro K6000 has 12 GB. The Quadro K6000 offers 200% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 320 GB/s (Radeon R9 290 / 390) vs 211 GB/s (Quadro K6000) — a 51.7% advantage for the Radeon R9 290 / 390. Bus width: 512-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (Radeon R9 290 / 390) vs 1.5 MB (Quadro K6000) — the Quadro K6000 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon R9 290 / 390 | Quadro K6000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 12 GB+200% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 320 GB/s+52% | 211 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 512-bit+100% | 256-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1.5 MB+50% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.0 (Radeon R9 290 / 390) vs 11.0 (Quadro K6000). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 6 vs 4.
| Feature | Radeon R9 290 / 390 | Quadro K6000 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.0+9% | 11.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2+9% | 1.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6+2% | 4.5 |
| Max Displays | 6+50% | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 2.0 (Radeon R9 290 / 390) vs NVENC 1.0 (Quadro K6000). Decoder: UVD 4.2 vs PureVideo HD VP5. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 (Radeon R9 290 / 390) vs MPEG-2,H.264 (Quadro K6000).
| Feature | Radeon R9 290 / 390 | Quadro K6000 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 2.0 | NVENC 1.0 |
| Decoder | UVD 4.2 | PureVideo HD VP5 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 | MPEG-2,H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R9 290 / 390 draws 300W versus the Quadro K6000's 225W — a 28.6% difference. The Quadro K6000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 750W (Radeon R9 290 / 390) vs 350W (Quadro K6000). Power connectors: 6-pin + 8-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 275mm vs 265mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 95°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | Radeon R9 290 / 390 | Quadro K6000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 300W | 225W-25% |
| Recommended PSU | 750W | 350W-53% |
| Power Connector | 6-pin + 8-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 275mm | 265mm |
| Height | 109mm | 110mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 95°C | 80°C-16% |
| Perf/Watt | 27.2 | 35.5+31% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R9 290 / 390 launched at $329 MSRP and currently averages $65, while the Quadro K6000 launched at $5265 and now averages $300. The Radeon R9 290 / 390 costs 78.3% less ($235 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 125.4 (Radeon R9 290 / 390) vs 26.6 (Quadro K6000) — the Radeon R9 290 / 390 offers 371.4% better value. The Radeon R9 290 / 390 is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2013).
| Feature | Radeon R9 290 / 390 | Quadro K6000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $329-94% | $5265 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $65-78% | $300 |
| Performance per Dollar | 125.4+371% | 26.6 |
| Codename | Grenada | GK110B |
| Release | June 18 2015 | July 23 2013 |
| Ranking | #296 | #318 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
















