Radeon RX Vega 9 vs Quadro FX 370

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
330 350 370 370 LP 380 380 LP
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
2 3 5 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 9

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 370 with Radeon RX Vega 9, including specs and performance data.

FX 370
2007, $129
256 MB DDR2, 35 Watt
0.20

RX Vega 9 outperforms FX 370 by a whopping 2405% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
FX 370 FX 370
RX Vega 9 RX Vega 9

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking1451670
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.4425.88
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Vega (2017−2020)
GPU code nameG84Vega Raven Ridge
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date12 September 2007 (18 years ago)26 October 2017 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$129 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores16576
Core clock speed360 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data1300 MHz
Number of transistors289 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology80 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate2.880no data
Floating-point processing power0.02304 TFLOPSno data
ROPs4no data
TMUs8no data
L2 Cache16 KBno 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).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16no data
Length198 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeDDR2no data
Maximum RAM amount256 MBno data
Memory bus width64 Bitno data
Memory clock speed500 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth8 GB/sno data
Shared memoryno 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 Connectors2x DVIno data

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12_1
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL3.3no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA1.1-

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 HD0−118

Cost per frame, $

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Fortnite 22
+0%
22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Fortnite 16
+0%
16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
+0%
13
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8
+0%
8
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 9
+0%
9
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 0.20 5.01
Recency 12 September 2007 26 October 2017
Chip lithography 80 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 15 Watt

RX Vega 9 has a 2405% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 471.4% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega 9 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 370 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 370 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX Vega 9 is a notebook one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.

NVIDIA Quadro FX 370
Quadro FX 370
AMD Radeon RX Vega 9
Radeon RX Vega 9
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

FX 370 Quadro FX 370
vs
NVS 300 NVS 300
RX Vega 9 Radeon RX Vega 9
vs
GeForce 945M GeForce 945M
FX 370 Quadro FX 370
vs
Quadro 400 Quadro 400
FX 1700 FX 1700
vs
HD 6770 Green Edition HD 6770 Green Edition
FX 1700 FX 1700
vs
ATI HD 5670 640SP Edition HD 5670 640SP Edition
FX 1700 FX 1700
vs
ATI HD 5770 Mac Edition HD 5770 Mac Edition
FX 1700 FX 1700
vs
Arc A730M Arc A730M
FX 370 FX 370
vs
Tesla K40s Tesla K40s
FX 370 FX 370
vs
RTX 2050 Max-Q RTX 2050 Max-Q
FX 370 FX 370
vs
H200 NVL H200 NVL
FX 570 FX 570
vs
ATI HD 4350 AGP HD 4350 AGP
FX 570 FX 570
vs
ATI FireMV 2250 PCIe x1 FireMV 2250 PCIe x1
FX 570 FX 570
vs
Vega 6 Mobile Vega 6 Mobile

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

1.2 10 votes

Rate Quadro FX 370 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 29 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 9 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 370 or Radeon RX Vega 9, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.