GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile vs Radeon R9 370
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R9 370 with GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile, including specs and performance data.
RTX 3070 Mobile outperforms R9 370 by a whopping 204% 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 | 477 | 170 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 96 |
| Power efficiency | 7.99 | 23.25 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) | Ampere (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | Trinidad | GA104 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 5 May 2015 (11 years ago) | 12 January 2021 (5 years ago) |
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 | 1280 | 5120 |
| Core clock speed | 925 MHz | 1110 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 975 MHz | 1560 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 2,800 million | 17,400 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 110 Watt | 125 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 78.00 | 249.6 |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.496 TFLOPS | 15.97 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 80 |
| TMUs | 80 | 160 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 160 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 40 |
| L1 Cache | 384 KB | 5 MB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 4 MB |
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).
| Laptop size | no data | large |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | 221 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 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 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1400 MHz | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 179.2 GB/s | 448.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
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 outputs |
| HDMI | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.2 |
| CUDA | - | 8.6 |
| DLSS | - | + |
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.
3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.
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 | 45 | 109
+142%
|
| 1440p | 21−24 | 68
+224%
|
| 4K | 14−16 | 44
+214%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Atomic Heart | 187 | 187 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 241 | 241 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 119 | 119 |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 140 | 140 |
Full HD
Medium
| Atomic Heart | 144 | 144 |
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130 | 120−130 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 230 | 230 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 107 | 107 |
| Far Cry 5 | 119 | 119 |
| Fortnite | 150−160 | 150−160 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 189 | 189 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150 | 140−150 |
| Valorant | 210−220 | 210−220 |
Full HD
High
| Atomic Heart | 89 | 89 |
| Battlefield 5 | 134 | 134 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 172 | 172 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280 | 270−280 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 88 | 88 |
| Dota 2 | 130 | 130 |
| Far Cry 5 | 114 | 114 |
| Fortnite | 150−160 | 150−160 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 188 | 188 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 125 | 125 |
| Metro Exodus | 97 | 97 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150 | 140−150 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 170 | 170 |
| Valorant | 210−220 | 210−220 |
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 126 | 126 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 74 | 74 |
| Dota 2 | 120 | 120 |
| Far Cry 5 | 107 | 107 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 167 | 167 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150 | 140−150 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 94 | 94 |
| Valorant | 183 | 183 |
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 150−160 | 150−160 |
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 106 | 106 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 240−250 | 240−250 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 83 | 83 |
| Metro Exodus | 59 | 59 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180 | 170−180 |
| Valorant | 254 | 254 |
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 102 | 102 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 47 | 47 |
| Far Cry 5 | 91 | 91 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 140 | 140 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 60−65 | 60−65 |
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 90−95 | 90−95 |
4K
High
| Atomic Heart | 27−30 | 27−30 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 32 | 32 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 83 | 83 |
| Metro Exodus | 37 | 37 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 64 | 64 |
| Valorant | 238 | 238 |
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 63 | 63 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 35−40 | 35−40 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 22 | 22 |
| Dota 2 | 109 | 109 |
| Far Cry 5 | 51 | 51 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 93 | 93 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45 | 40−45 |
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 40−45 | 40−45 |
This is how R9 370 and RTX 3070 Mobile compete in popular games:
- RTX 3070 Mobile is 142% faster in 1080p
- RTX 3070 Mobile is 224% faster in 1440p
- RTX 3070 Mobile is 214% faster in 4K
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 11.29 | 34.33 |
| Recency | 5 May 2015 | 12 January 2021 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 8 GB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 110 Watt | 125 Watt |
R9 370 has 12% lower power consumption.
RTX 3070 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 204% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 71% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 370 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon R9 370 is a desktop graphics card while GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
