Radeon RX Vega 9 vs Quadro FX 370M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro FX 370M with Radeon RX Vega 9, including specs and performance data.
RX Vega 9 outperforms 370M by a whopping 2177% 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 | 1434 | 670 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 0.85 | 25.88 |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | Vega (2017−2020) |
| GPU code name | G98 | Vega Raven Ridge |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 15 August 2008 (17 years ago) | 26 October 2017 (8 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 8 | 576 |
| Core clock speed | 550 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1300 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 210 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 20 Watt | 15 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 2.200 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.0224 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 4 | no data |
| TMUs | 4 | no data |
| L2 Cache | 16 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).
| Interface | MXM-II | 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 | GDDR3 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 256 MB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | no data |
| Memory clock speed | 600 MHz | no data |
| Memory bandwidth | 9.6 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | - | - |
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 | No outputs | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12_1 |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | no data |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | no data |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | no data |
| Vulkan | N/A | - |
| CUDA | 1.1 | - |
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 HD | 0−1 | 18 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−900%
|
10−11
+900%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−900%
|
10−11
+900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−700%
|
24−27
+700%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−186%
|
20−22
+186%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−148%
|
60−65
+148%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 12−14
−625%
|
85−90
+625%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−900%
|
10−11
+900%
|
| Dota 2 | 9−10
−378%
|
40−45
+378%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−700%
|
24−27
+700%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−186%
|
20−22
+186%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−160%
|
13
+160%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−148%
|
60−65
+148%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−900%
|
10−11
+900%
|
| Dota 2 | 9−10
−378%
|
40−45
+378%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−700%
|
24−27
+700%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−186%
|
20−22
+186%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−60%
|
8
+60%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−148%
|
60−65
+148%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−400%
|
10−11
+400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−1700%
|
35−40
+1700%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Escape from Tarkov | 2−3
−400%
|
10−11
+400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−1100%
|
12−14
+1100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−600%
|
7−8
+600%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−14.3%
|
16−18
+14.3%
|
| Valorant | 1−2
−2500%
|
24−27
+2500%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
−400%
|
5−6
+400%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+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 5 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+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 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%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 20−22
+0%
|
20−22
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 9
+0%
|
9
+0%
|
1440p
High
| 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%
|
| 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%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
4K
High
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+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%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX Vega 9 is 2500% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RX Vega 9 performs better in 27 tests (44%)
- there's a draw in 34 tests (56%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.22 | 5.01 |
| Recency | 15 August 2008 | 26 October 2017 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 20 Watt | 15 Watt |
RX Vega 9 has a 2177.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 33.3% lower power consumption.
The Radeon RX Vega 9 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 370M in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro FX 370M is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon RX Vega 9 is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
