GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs Radeon R9 370

Place in performance ranking	374	314
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	1.79	8.34
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)	Turing (2018−2021)
GPU code name	Trinidad	N18P-G0 / N18P-G61
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	5 May 2015 (9 years ago)	23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Current price	$325	$1185

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1650 Max-Q has 366% better value for money than R9 370.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	1280	1024
Core clock speed	925 MHz	1020 MHz
Boost clock speed	975 MHz	1245 MHz
Number of transistors	2,800 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	110 Watt	35 Watt
Texture fill rate	78.00	72.00
Floating-point performance	2,496 gflops	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Radeon R9 370 and GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop size	no data	medium sized
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	221 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	None

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	GDDR5	GDDR5, GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	5600 MHz	8000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	179.2 GB/s	112.1 GB/s
Shared memory	no data	-

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	2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort	No outputs
HDMI	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2.140
CUDA	no data	7.5

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 370 12.23

GTX 1650 Max-Q 15.97
+30.6%

GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q outperforms Radeon R9 370 by 31% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

R9 370 4722

GTX 1650 Max-Q 6169
+30.6%

GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q outperforms Radeon R9 370 by 31% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

R9 370 5249

GTX 1650 Max-Q 7779
+48.2%

GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q outperforms Radeon R9 370 by 48% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

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	45 −35.6%	61 +35.6%
1440p	21−24 −33.3%	28 +33.3%
4K	14−16 −35.7%	19 +35.7%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

18−20

−38.9%

24−27
+38.9%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	35−40 −40%	49 +40%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	18−20 −50%	27−30 +50%
Battlefield 5	45−50 −40%	63 +40%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	30−33 −40%	42 +40%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 −38.9%	24−27 +38.9%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −37.1%	48 +37.1%
Far Cry New Dawn	45−50 −31.1%	59 +31.1%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 −34.5%	74 +34.5%
Hitman 3	21−24 −47.6%	30−35 +47.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 −42.2%	60−65 +42.2%
Metro Exodus	50−55 −42%	71 +42%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40−45 −35%	54 +35%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 −42.9%	50−55 +42.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −45.7%	50−55 +45.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−33 −36.7%	41 +36.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	18−20 −50%	27−30 +50%
Battlefield 5	40−45 −37.5%	55 +37.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	30−33 −33.3%	40 +33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 −38.9%	24−27 +38.9%
Far Cry 5	27−30 −40.7%	38 +40.7%
Far Cry New Dawn	30−33 −36.7%	41 +36.7%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 −37.7%	179 +37.7%
Hitman 3	21−24 −47.6%	30−35 +47.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 −42.2%	60−65 +42.2%
Metro Exodus	40−45 −32.5%	53 +32.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−33 −50%	45 +50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 −42.9%	50−55 +42.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 −32.5%	53 +32.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −45.7%	50−55 +45.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 −42.9%	20 +42.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	18−20 −50%	27−30 +50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 −38.9%	25 +38.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 −38.9%	24−27 +38.9%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −44.4%	26 +44.4%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 −37.5%	55 +37.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 −42.2%	60−65 +42.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 −42.9%	50−55 +42.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 −42.9%	30 +42.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −45.7%	50−55 +45.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

30−33

−40%

42
+40%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 −37.5%	33 +37.5%
Far Cry New Dawn	30−33 −33.3%	40 +33.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −41.7%	17 +41.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10 −44.4%	12−14 +44.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 −42.9%	20−22 +42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −50%	9−10 +50%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −44.4%	24−27 +44.4%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 −47.6%	30−35 +47.6%
Hitman 3	14−16 −35.7%	18−20 +35.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 −33.3%	30−35 +33.3%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −33.3%	32 +33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 −42.9%	30−33 +42.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 −41.7%	16−18 +41.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	7−8 −42.9%	10−11 +42.9%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

18−20

−44.4%

24−27
+44.4%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 −37.5%	11 +37.5%
Far Cry New Dawn	9−10 −44.4%	13 +44.4%
Hitman 3	9−10 −33.3%	12−14 +33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 −41.7%	16−18 +41.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 −33.3%	12 +33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 −50%	18 +50%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 −33.3%	8 +33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6−7 −33.3%	8−9 +33.3%
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 −50%	9 +50%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −37.5%	21−24 +37.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 −41.7%	16−18 +41.7%
Metro Exodus	12−14 −33.3%	16 +33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%