UHD Graphics 770 vs Radeon HD 6370M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 6370M with UHD Graphics 770, including specs and performance data.
UHD Graphics 770 outperforms HD 6370M by a whopping 757% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1171 | 584 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 31 |
| Power efficiency | 4.50 | 28.28 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) | Generation 12.2 (2022−2023) |
| GPU code name | Robson | Raptor Lake GT1 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 26 November 2010 (14 years ago) | 27 September 2022 (2 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 | 80 | 256 |
| Core clock speed | 750 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1650 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 292 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 11 Watt | 15 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 6.000 | 26.40 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.12 TFLOPS | 0.8448 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 8 |
| TMUs | 8 | 16 |
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 | PCIe 2.0 x16 | Ring Bus |
| Width | no data | IGP |
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 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 12.8 GB/s | no data |
| 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 | No outputs | Motherboard Dependent |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 6.6 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
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.
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 Vantage Performance
3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.
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 | 2−3
−850%
| 19
+850%
|
| 4K | 1−2
−1300%
| 14
+1300%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−71.4%
|
12−14
+71.4%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−300%
|
12
+300%
|
| Elden Ring | 0−1 | 16−18 |
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5
+66.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−229%
|
23
+229%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 5−6
−260%
|
18−20
+260%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6
−16.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−333%
|
12−14
+333%
|
| Elden Ring | 0−1 | 11 |
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9
−275%
|
30
+275%
|
| Fortnite | 1−2
−3500%
|
35−40
+3500%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−157%
|
18
+157%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−410%
|
50−55
+410%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 5−6
−260%
|
18−20
+260%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−217%
|
18−20
+217%
|
| World of Tanks | 18−20
−416%
|
95−100
+416%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+40%
|
5
−40%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−333%
|
12−14
+333%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9
−263%
|
27−30
+263%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−129%
|
16
+129%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−410%
|
50−55
+410%
|
1440p
High Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
−825%
|
35−40
+825%
|
| World of Tanks | 3−4
−1400%
|
45−50
+1400%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−225%
|
12−14
+225%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−125%
|
9−10
+125%
|
| Valorant | 5−6
−220%
|
16−18
+220%
|
4K
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−13.3%
|
16−18
+13.3%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−13.3%
|
16−18
+13.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−800%
|
18−20
+800%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−13.3%
|
16−18
+13.3%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−400%
|
5−6
+400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
+7.1%
|
14
−7.1%
|
| Valorant | 1−2
−500%
|
6−7
+500%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Valorant | 16
+0%
|
16
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 20
+0%
|
20
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 9
+0%
|
9
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Valorant | 20−22
+0%
|
20−22
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 40
+0%
|
40
+0%
|
| Valorant | 20−22
+0%
|
20−22
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Elden Ring | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Elden Ring | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
This is how HD 6370M and UHD Graphics 770 compete in popular games:
- UHD Graphics 770 is 850% faster in 1080p
- UHD Graphics 770 is 1300% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD 6370M is 40% faster.
- in Fortnite, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the UHD Graphics 770 is 3500% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- HD 6370M is ahead in 3 tests (5%)
- UHD Graphics 770 is ahead in 29 tests (49%)
- there's a draw in 27 tests (46%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.72 | 6.17 |
| Recency | 26 November 2010 | 27 September 2022 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 11 Watt | 15 Watt |
HD 6370M has 36.4% lower power consumption.
UHD Graphics 770, on the other hand, has a 756.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.
The UHD Graphics 770 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6370M in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon HD 6370M is a notebook card while UHD Graphics 770 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
