GeForce MX230 vs Radeon R9 370

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 370 with GeForce MX230, including specs and performance data.

R9 370
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 110 Watt
11.29
+160%

R9 370 outperforms MX230 by a whopping 160% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking460714
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency7.9033.50
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameTrinidadGP108
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date5 May 2015 (10 years ago)21 February 2019 (7 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 cores1280256
Core clock speed925 MHz1519 MHz
Boost clock speed975 MHz1582 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 million1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)110 Watt10 Watt
Texture fill rate78.0025.31
Floating-point processing power2.496 TFLOPS0.81 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs8016
L1 Cache384 KB96 KB
L2 Cache512 KB512 KB

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
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length221 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1400 MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s48.06 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA-+

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

R9 370 11.29
+160%
GeForce MX230 4.35

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 370 4722
+160%
Samples: 3
GeForce MX230 1815
Samples: 1086

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 370 5249
+113%
GeForce MX230 2468

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 HD45
+114%
21
−114%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 20
+0%
20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 15
+0%
15
+0%
Fortnite 33
+0%
33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21
+0%
21
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24
+0%
24
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 16
+0%
16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 65
+0%
65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 58
+0%
58
+0%
Far Cry 5 13
+0%
13
+0%
Fortnite 20
+0%
20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16
+0%
16
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 19
+0%
19
+0%
Metro Exodus 4
+0%
4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21
+0%
21
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 15
+0%
15
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 12
+0%
12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 43
+0%
43
+0%
Far Cry 5 12
+0%
12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12
+0%
12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 17
+0%
17
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9
+0%
9
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 16
+0%
16
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how R9 370 and GeForce MX230 compete in popular games:

  • R9 370 is 114% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 56 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.29 4.35
Recency 5 May 2015 21 February 2019
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 110 Watt 10 Watt

R9 370 has a 160% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GeForce MX230, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 1000% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 370 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce MX230 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 370 is a desktop graphics card while GeForce MX230 is a notebook one.

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.


4 494 votes

Rate Radeon R9 370 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 1507 votes

Rate GeForce MX230 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 370 or GeForce MX230, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.