Radeon HD 6370M vs HD 6510G2

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 6510G2 and Radeon HD 6370M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD 6510G2
2011
1.34
+88.7%

HD 6510G2 outperforms HD 6370M by an impressive 89% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking10331178
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data4.44
ArchitectureTerascale 2 (2009−2015)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameno dataRobson
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date14 June 2011 (13 years ago)26 November 2010 (14 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 cores40080
Core clock speedno data750 MHz
Number of transistorsno data292 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data11 Watt
Texture fill rateno data6.000
Floating-point processing powerno data0.12 TFLOPS
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data8

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 sizemedium sizedno data
Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x16

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 typeno dataGDDR3
Maximum RAM amountno data1 GB
Memory bus widthno data64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data800 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data12.8 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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1111.2 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data5.0
OpenGLno data4.4
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-N/A

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Fortnite 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Valorant 30−35
+17.2%
27−30
−17.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 27−30
+52.6%
18−20
−52.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Dota 2 16−18
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
Fortnite 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2 0−1
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Valorant 30−35
+17.2%
27−30
−17.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Dota 2 16−18
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Valorant 30−35
+17.2%
27−30
−17.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 1−2 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Valorant 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the HD 6510G2 is 167% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD 6510G2 is ahead in 32 tests (89%)
  • there's a draw in 4 tests (11%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.34 0.71
Recency 14 June 2011 26 November 2010

HD 6510G2 has a 88.7% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 6 months.

The Radeon HD 6510G2 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6370M in performance tests.

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.


AMD Radeon HD 6510G2
Radeon HD 6510G2
AMD Radeon HD 6370M
Radeon HD 6370M

Other comparisons

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

Community ratings

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


3.7 6 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6510G2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 136 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6370M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon HD 6510G2 or Radeon HD 6370M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.