Radeon R7 370 vs Titan X Pascal

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Titan X Pascal and Radeon R7 370, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Titan X Pascal
2016
12 GB GDDR5X, 250 Watt
33.10
+190%

Titan X Pascal outperforms R7 370 by a whopping 190% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking161420
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.806.52
Power efficiency9.307.30
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameGP102Trinidad
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date2 August 2016 (8 years ago)18 June 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,199 $149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

Titan X Pascal has 4% 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 cores35841024
Core clock speed1417 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1531 MHz975 MHz
Number of transistors11,800 million2,800 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt110 Watt
Texture fill rate342.962.40
Floating-point processing power10.97 TFLOPS1.997 TFLOPS
ROPs9632
TMUs22464

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
Length267 mm152 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-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 typeGDDR5XGDDR5
Maximum RAM amount12 GB4 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1251 MHz975 MHz
Memory bandwidth480.4 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Eyefinity-+
Number of Eyefinity displaysno data6
HDMI++
DisplayPort support-+
G-SYNC 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 and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)DirectX® 12
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan++
Mantle-+
CUDA+-

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.

Titan X Pascal 33.10
+190%
R7 370 11.43

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.

Titan X Pascal 13026
+190%
R7 370 4499

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Titan X Pascal 35981
+322%
R7 370 8519

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Titan X Pascal 100948
+251%
R7 370 28723

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.

Titan X Pascal 27349
+359%
R7 370 5961

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Titan X Pascal 136891
+244%
R7 370 39809

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Titan X Pascal 514513
+59.2%
R7 370 323114

Unigine Heaven 4.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark, a newer version of Unigine 3.0 with relatively small differences. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. The benchmark is still sometimes used, despite its significant age, as it was released back in 2013.

Titan X Pascal 4329
+517%
R7 370 702

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 HD128
+172%
47
−172%
1440p76
+33.3%
57
−33.3%
4K59
+195%
20
−195%

Cost per frame, $

1080p9.37
−195%
3.17
+195%
1440p15.78
−504%
2.61
+504%
4K20.32
−173%
7.45
+173%
  • R7 370 has 195% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • R7 370 has 504% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • R7 370 has 173% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 173
+541%
27−30
−541%
Counter-Strike 2 92
+360%
20−22
−360%
Cyberpunk 2077 83
+261%
21−24
−261%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 127
+370%
27−30
−370%
Battlefield 5 153
+219%
45−50
−219%
Counter-Strike 2 74
+270%
20−22
−270%
Cyberpunk 2077 74
+222%
21−24
−222%
Far Cry 5 162
+338%
35−40
−338%
Fortnite 210
+98.1%
106
−98.1%
Forza Horizon 4 127
+170%
45−50
−170%
Forza Horizon 5 124
+328%
27−30
−328%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 113
+197%
38
−197%
Valorant 296
+196%
100−105
−196%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 78
+189%
27−30
−189%
Battlefield 5 147
+206%
45−50
−206%
Counter-Strike 2 63
+215%
20−22
−215%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+72.5%
160−170
−72.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 65
+183%
21−24
−183%
Dota 2 252
+232%
75−80
−232%
Far Cry 5 149
+303%
35−40
−303%
Fortnite 199
+385%
41
−385%
Forza Horizon 4 121
+157%
45−50
−157%
Forza Horizon 5 113
+290%
27−30
−290%
Grand Theft Auto V 160
+264%
44
−264%
Metro Exodus 96
+336%
21−24
−336%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 113
+277%
30
−277%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 184
+426%
35
−426%
Valorant 275
+175%
100−105
−175%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 137
+185%
45−50
−185%
Counter-Strike 2 55
+175%
20−22
−175%
Cyberpunk 2077 57
+148%
21−24
−148%
Dota 2 232
+205%
75−80
−205%
Far Cry 5 140
+278%
35−40
−278%
Forza Horizon 4 112
+138%
45−50
−138%
Forza Horizon 5 97
+234%
27−30
−234%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 102
+162%
35−40
−162%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 95
+332%
22
−332%
Valorant 181
+805%
20
−805%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 170
+467%
30
−467%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+92.9%
14−16
−92.9%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220
+168%
81
−168%
Grand Theft Auto V 103
+544%
16−18
−544%
Metro Exodus 58
+346%
12−14
−346%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+178%
60−65
−178%
Valorant 258
+115%
120−130
−115%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+190%
27−30
−190%
Cyberpunk 2077 37
+311%
9−10
−311%
Far Cry 5 101
+339%
21−24
−339%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+219%
27−30
−219%
Forza Horizon 5 72
+279%
18−20
−279%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+229%
16−18
−229%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 80−85
+248%
21−24
−248%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27
+178%
9−10
−178%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%
Grand Theft Auto V 99
+350%
21−24
−350%
Metro Exodus 36
+414%
7−8
−414%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 68
+423%
12−14
−423%
Valorant 257
+343%
55−60
−343%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 71
+407%
14−16
−407%
Counter-Strike 2 8
+100%
4−5
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 17
+325%
4−5
−325%
Dota 2 160
+300%
40−45
−300%
Far Cry 5 53
+382%
10−12
−382%
Forza Horizon 4 73
+284%
18−20
−284%
Forza Horizon 5 45
+400%
9−10
−400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 44
+340%
10−11
−340%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 60
+500%
10−11
−500%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 45
+0%
45
+0%

This is how Titan X Pascal and R7 370 compete in popular games:

  • Titan X Pascal is 172% faster in 1080p
  • Titan X Pascal is 33% faster in 1440p
  • Titan X Pascal is 195% faster in 4K

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

  • in Valorant, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Titan X Pascal is 805% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Titan X Pascal is ahead in 67 tests (99%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.10 11.43
Recency 2 August 2016 18 June 2015
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 110 Watt

Titan X Pascal has a 189.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

R7 370, on the other hand, has 127.3% lower power consumption.

The Titan X Pascal is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 370 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.


NVIDIA Titan X Pascal
Titan X Pascal
AMD Radeon R7 370
Radeon R7 370

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.


2.6 3001 vote

Rate Titan X Pascal on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 485 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Titan X Pascal or Radeon R7 370, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.