Radeon RX 6500 vs R7 370
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R7 370 with Radeon RX 6500, including specs and performance data.
RX 6500 outperforms R7 370 by an impressive 72% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 487 | 341 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 5.85 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 7.59 | no data |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) | no data |
| GPU code name | Trinidad | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Design | reference | no data |
| Release date | 18 June 2015 (11 years ago) | no data |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $149 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 1024 | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 975 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 2,800 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 110 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 62.40 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.997 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 32 | no data |
| TMUs | 64 | no data |
| L1 Cache | 256 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | no data |
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 support | PCIe 3.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | no data |
| Length | 152 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1 x 6-pin | no data |
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 type | GDDR5 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | no data |
| Memory clock speed | 975 MHz | no data |
| Memory bandwidth | 179.2 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | - | no data |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | no data |
| Eyefinity | + | - |
| Number of Eyefinity displays | 6 | no data |
| 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 | + | - |
| TrueAudio | + | - |
| VCE | + | - |
| DDMA audio | + | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | no data |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | no data |
| Vulkan | + | - |
| Mantle | + | - |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
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 HD | 46 | 75−80
+63%
|
| 1440p | 57 | 95−100
+66.7%
|
| 4K | 20 | 30−35
+50%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 3.24 | no data |
| 1440p | 2.61 | no data |
| 4K | 7.45 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Atomic Heart | 27−30 | 45−50
+66.7%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 55−60 | 100−105
+69.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24 | 35−40
+59.1%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Atomic Heart | 27−30 | 45−50
+66.7%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50 | 75−80
+64.6%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 55−60 | 100−105
+69.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24 | 35−40
+59.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40 | 60−65
+77.1%
|
| Fortnite | 106
+6%
|
100−105 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50 | 75−80
+63.8%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 38 | 70−75
+89.5%
|
| Valorant | 95−100 | 140−150
+42.9%
|
Full HD
High
| Atomic Heart | 27−30 | 45−50
+66.7%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50 | 75−80
+64.6%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 55−60 | 100−105
+69.5%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 150−160 | 220−230
+43.4%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24 | 35−40
+59.1%
|
| Dota 2 | 75−80 | 100−110
+42.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40 | 60−65
+77.1%
|
| Far Cry 6 | 27−30 | 50−55
+79.3%
|
| Fortnite | 41 | 100−105
+144%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50 | 75−80
+63.8%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 44 | 70−75
+59.1%
|
| Metro Exodus | 21−24 | 40−45
+81.8%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30 | 70−75
+140%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 35 | 50−55
+48.6%
|
| Valorant | 95−100 | 140−150
+42.9%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50 | 75−80
+64.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24 | 35−40
+59.1%
|
| Dota 2 | 75−80 | 100−110
+42.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40 | 60−65
+77.1%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50 | 75−80
+63.8%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40 | 70−75
+84.6%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 22 | 50−55
+136%
|
| Valorant | 20 | 30−33
+50%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 30 | 100−105
+233%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 20−22 | 30−33
+50%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 81 | 130−140
+67.9%
|
| Far Cry 6 | 16−18 | 30−33
+87.5%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16 | 30−35
+113%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12−14 | 24−27
+100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 60−65 | 110−120
+71.9%
|
| Valorant | 100−110 | 160−170
+53.8%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 27−30 | 50−55
+92.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9−10 | 14−16
+55.6%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24 | 40−45
+82.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 24−27 | 45−50
+80.8%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16 | 24−27
+60%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 21−24 | 40−45
+87%
|
4K
High
| Atomic Heart | 9−10 | 14−16
+55.6%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7 | 10−11
+66.7%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 45 | 75−80
+66.7%
|
| Far Cry 6 | 5−6 | 9−10
+80%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 21−24 | 30−35
+61.9%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7−8 | 14−16
+114%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14 | 27−30
+108%
|
| Valorant | 50−55 | 95−100
+96%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16 | 27−30
+100%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7 | 10−11
+66.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 5−6
+66.7%
|
| Dota 2 | 40−45 | 65−70
+62.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12 | 21−24
+90.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20 | 30−35
+73.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11 | 18−20
+90%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 10−11 | 18−20
+90%
|
This is how R7 370 and RX 6500 compete in popular games:
- RX 6500 is 63% faster in 1080p
- RX 6500 is 67% faster in 1440p
- RX 6500 is 50% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Fortnite, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the R7 370 is 6% faster.
- in Fortnite, with 1080p resolution and the Epic Preset, the RX 6500 is 233% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- R7 370 performs better in 1 test (2%)
- RX 6500 performs better in 44 tests (98%)
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
