Radeon R7 370 vs R9 285

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 285 and Radeon R7 370, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 285
2014
2 GB GDDR5, 190 Watt
17.32
+48.2%

R9 285 outperforms R7 370 by a considerable 48% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking313407
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation8.586.44
Power efficiency6.317.36
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameTongaTrinidad
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date2 September 2014 (10 years ago)18 June 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$249 $149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 285 has 33% 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 cores17921024
Core clock speed918 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data975 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million2,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)190 Watt110 Watt
Texture fill rate102.862.40
Floating-point processing power3.29 TFLOPS1.997 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs11264

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 supportno dataPCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length221 mm152 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pin1 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1375 MHz975 MHz
Memory bandwidth176.0 GB/s179.2 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.22x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Eyefinity-+
Number of Eyefinity displaysno data6
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 audiono data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)DirectX® 12
Shader Model6.55.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.12.0
Vulkan1.2.170+
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.

R9 285 17.32
+48.2%
R7 370 11.69

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.

R9 285 6680
+48.1%
R7 370 4510

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

R9 285 8570
+43.8%
R7 370 5961

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 HD65−70
+44.4%
45
−44.4%
1440p90−95
+45.2%
62
−45.2%
4K27−30
+35%
20
−35%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.833.31
1440p2.772.40
4K9.227.45

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Hitman 3 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Hitman 3 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 89
+0%
89
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Hitman 3 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22
+0%
22
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Hitman 3 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

This is how R9 285 and R7 370 compete in popular games:

  • R9 285 is 44% faster in 1080p
  • R9 285 is 45% faster in 1440p
  • R9 285 is 35% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 17.32 11.69
Recency 2 September 2014 18 June 2015
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 190 Watt 110 Watt

R9 285 has a 48.2% higher aggregate performance score.

R7 370, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 9 months, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 72.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 285 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 370 in performance tests.


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 R9 285
Radeon R9 285
AMD Radeon R7 370
Radeon R7 370

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.


4.2 76 votes

Rate Radeon R9 285 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 453 votes

Rate Radeon R7 370 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.