Radeon Pro 5300M vs R7 370

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 370 with Radeon Pro 5300M, including specs and performance data.

R7 370
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 110 Watt
11.70

Pro 5300M outperforms R7 370 by a substantial 32% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking410344
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.66no data
Power efficiency7.3012.44
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)
GPU code nameTrinidadNavi 14
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date18 June 2015 (9 years ago)13 November 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores10241280
Core clock speedno data1000 MHz
Boost clock speed975 MHz1250 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 million6,400 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)110 Watt85 Watt
Texture fill rate62.40100.0
Floating-point processing power1.997 TFLOPS3.2 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs6480

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 sizeno datamedium sized
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length152 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed975 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s192.0 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
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.

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.0
Vulkan+1.2.131
Mantle+-

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.

R7 370 11.70
Pro 5300M 15.42
+31.8%

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.

R7 370 4504
Pro 5300M 5940
+31.9%

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 HD47
−27.7%
60−65
+27.7%
1440p65
−30.8%
85−90
+30.8%
4K18
−16.7%
21−24
+16.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.17no data
1440p2.29no data
4K8.28no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
−33.3%
24−27
+33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
−29.6%
35−40
+29.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
−38.9%
24−27
+38.9%
Battlefield 5 35−40
−35.1%
50−55
+35.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
−29.2%
30−35
+29.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
−33.3%
24−27
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−33.3%
35−40
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
−31.3%
40−45
+31.3%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
−28.2%
100−105
+28.2%
Hitman 3 21−24
−31.8%
27−30
+31.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
−25.8%
75−80
+25.8%
Metro Exodus 35−40
−39.5%
50−55
+39.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
−31.3%
40−45
+31.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
−31.6%
50−55
+31.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
−16.2%
75−80
+16.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
−29.6%
35−40
+29.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
−38.9%
24−27
+38.9%
Battlefield 5 35−40
−35.1%
50−55
+35.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
−29.2%
30−35
+29.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
−33.3%
24−27
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−33.3%
35−40
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
−31.3%
40−45
+31.3%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
−28.2%
100−105
+28.2%
Hitman 3 21−24
−31.8%
27−30
+31.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
−25.8%
75−80
+25.8%
Metro Exodus 35−40
−39.5%
50−55
+39.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
−31.3%
40−45
+31.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
−31.6%
50−55
+31.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 89
+141%
35−40
−141%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
−16.2%
75−80
+16.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
−29.6%
35−40
+29.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
−38.9%
24−27
+38.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
−29.2%
30−35
+29.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
−33.3%
24−27
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−33.3%
35−40
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
−28.2%
100−105
+28.2%
Hitman 3 21−24
−31.8%
27−30
+31.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
−25.8%
75−80
+25.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
−31.6%
50−55
+31.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22
−68.2%
35−40
+68.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
−16.2%
75−80
+16.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
−31.3%
40−45
+31.3%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
−30.4%
30−33
+30.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
−33.3%
24−27
+33.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−25%
14−16
+25%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
−62.5%
12−14
+62.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
−41.7%
16−18
+41.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−38.5%
18−20
+38.5%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
−44.6%
80−85
+44.6%
Hitman 3 14−16
−20%
18−20
+20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
−29.2%
30−35
+29.2%
Metro Exodus 18−20
−42.1%
27−30
+42.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
−55.6%
27−30
+55.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−33.3%
16−18
+33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
−30.1%
95−100
+30.1%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
−31.6%
24−27
+31.6%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
−36.4%
14−16
+36.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
−37.5%
10−12
+37.5%
Hitman 3 8−9
−37.5%
10−12
+37.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
−44.4%
75−80
+44.4%
Metro Exodus 10−11
−50%
14−16
+50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−50%
14−16
+50%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−40%
21−24
+40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
−66.7%
14−16
+66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%

This is how R7 370 and Pro 5300M compete in popular games:

  • Pro 5300M is 28% faster in 1080p
  • Pro 5300M is 31% faster in 1440p
  • Pro 5300M is 17% faster in 4K

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R7 370 is 141% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro 5300M is 68% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R7 370 is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • Pro 5300M is ahead in 71 test (99%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.70 15.42
Recency 18 June 2015 13 November 2019
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 110 Watt 85 Watt

Pro 5300M has a 31.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 29.4% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro 5300M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 370 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 370 is a desktop card while Radeon Pro 5300M is a mobile workstation one.


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

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 R7 370
Radeon R7 370
AMD Radeon Pro 5300M
Radeon Pro 5300M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4 464 votes

Rate Radeon R7 370 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 170 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 5300M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.