Radeon R7 370 vs Quadro RTX 4000

Place in the ranking	109	413
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	37.79	6.67
Power efficiency	17.09	7.34
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code name	TU104	Trinidad
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Design	no data	reference
Release date	13 November 2018 (6 years ago)	18 June 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$899	$149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 4000 has 467% better value for money than R7 370.

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	2304	1024
Core clock speed	1005 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1545 MHz	975 MHz
Number of transistors	13,600 million	2,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	160 Watt	110 Watt
Texture fill rate	222.5	62.40
Floating-point processing power	7.119 TFLOPS	1.997 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	32
TMUs	144	64
Tensor Cores	288	no data
Ray Tracing Cores	36	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	no data	PCIe 3.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	241 mm	152 mm
Width	1-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	1 x 6-pin

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	GDDR6	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1625 MHz	975 MHz
Memory bandwidth	416.0 GB/s	179.2 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors	3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C	2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Eyefinity	-	+
Number of Eyefinity displays	no data	6
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 compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_1)	DirectX® 12
Shader Model	6.5	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	+
Mantle	-	+
CUDA	7.5	-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

RTX 4000 39.65
+239%

R7 370 11.71

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.

RTX 4000 15239
+239%

R7 370 4499

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	150−160 +219%	47 −219%
1440p	190−200 +233%	57 −233%
4K	65−70 +225%	20 −225%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	5.99 −89.1%	3.17 +89.1%
1440p	4.73 −81%	2.61 +81%
4K	13.83 −85.6%	7.45 +85.6%

R7 370 has 89% lower cost per frame in 1080p
R7 370 has 81% lower cost per frame in 1440p
R7 370 has 86% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Metro Exodus	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Valorant	35 +0%	35 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Dota 2	29 +0%	29 +0%
Far Cry 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Fortnite	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	44 +0%	44 +0%
Metro Exodus	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	55 +0%	55 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	37 +0%	37 +0%
Valorant	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
World of Tanks	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Dota 2	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Far Cry 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	27 +0%	27 +0%
Valorant	20 +0%	20 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
World of Tanks	81 +0%	81 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Far Cry 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Metro Exodus	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Valorant	17 +0%	17 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Dota 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Metro Exodus	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	37 +0%	37 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
World of Tanks	45 +0%	45 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Dota 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Fortnite	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Valorant	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%

This is how RTX 4000 and R7 370 compete in popular games:

RTX 4000 is 219% faster in 1080p
RTX 4000 is 233% faster in 1440p
RTX 4000 is 225% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 65 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	39.65	11.71
Recency	13 November 2018	18 June 2015
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	160 Watt	110 Watt

RTX 4000 has a 238.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

R7 370, on the other hand, has 45.5% lower power consumption.

The Quadro RTX 4000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 370 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 4000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon R7 370 is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.