Contents:HighlightsSummaryGaming PerformanceBenchmark PerformanceTechnical SpecsRelated ComparisonsRelated GPUs
Performance
Radeon R7 370
8,518.58% of 104,598
GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER114% better
18,224.517% of 104,598
The GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER has 114% better performance than the Radeon R7 370 for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
Performance per dollar
Radeon R7 370
57.1735% of 161.45
GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER100% better
114.6271% of 161.45
The GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER has 100% better value for the money than the Radeon R7 370 for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
Shop Radeon R7 370
Shop GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Summary
#
About the AMD Radeon R7 370 GPU
The AMD Radeon R7 370 is an end-of-life desktop graphics card that released in Q2 2015 with a MSRP of $149. It is built on the GCN 1.0 GPU microarchitecture (codename Trinidad) and is manufactured on a 28 nm process.
Memory
The R7 370 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, with a 1,400 MHz memory clock and a 256 bit interface. This gives it a memory bandwidth of 179.2 Gb/s, which affects how fast it can transfer data to and from memory. GPU memory stores temporary data that helps the GPU with complex math and graphics operations. More memory is generally better, as not having enough can cause performance bottlenecks.
Cores and Clock Speeds
The R7 370 includes 1,024 stream processors (SPs), the processing units for handling parallel computing tasks. The GPU operates at a core clock speed of 925 MHz and can dynamically boost its clock speed up to 975 MHz. Complementing the processing units are 64 texture mapping units (TMUs) for efficient texture filtering and 32 render output units (ROPs) for pixel processing.
Compatibility & Power Consumption
The R7 370 occupies 2 PCIe expansion slots. It supports DVI, HDMI 1.4a, DisplayPort 1.2 display connections. AMD recommends a power supply of at least 300 W to handle the GPU's thermal design power (TDP) of 110 W.
Benchmark Performance & Value
The R7 370 has the 196th best 3DMark 11 Performance GPU score among the 543 benchmarked GPUs in our database. It achieves 8.14% of the performance of the best benchmarked GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090. Its 8,518.5 score and $149 launch price (MSRP) gives it a performance per dollar of 57.17. This is the 59th best in value for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
About the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER GPU
The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is a desktop graphics card that launched in Q4 2019 with a MSRP of $159. It is built on the Turing GPU microarchitecture (codename TU116) and is manufactured on a 12 nm process.
Memory
The GTX 1650 SUPER has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory, with a 1,500 MHz memory clock and a 128 bit interface. This gives it a memory bandwidth of 192 Gb/s, which affects how fast it can transfer data to and from memory. GPU memory stores temporary data that helps the GPU with complex math and graphics operations. More memory is generally better, as not having enough can cause performance bottlenecks.
Cores and Clock Speeds
The GTX 1650 SUPER includes 1,280 CUDA cores, the processing units for handling parallel computing tasks. The GPU operates at a core clock speed of 1,530 MHz and can dynamically boost its clock speed up to 1,725 MHz. Complementing the processing units are 80 texture mapping units (TMUs) for efficient texture filtering and 32 render output units (ROPs) for pixel processing.
Compatibility & Power Consumption
The GTX 1650 SUPER occupies 2 PCIe expansion slots. It supports DVI, HDMI 2.0, DisplayPort 1.4a display connections. NVIDIA recommends a power supply of at least 300 W to handle the GPU's thermal design power (TDP) of 100 W.
Benchmark Performance & Value
The GTX 1650 SUPER has the 119th best 3DMark 11 Performance GPU score among the 543 benchmarked GPUs in our database. It achieves 17.42% of the performance of the best benchmarked GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090. Its 18,224.5 score and $159 launch price (MSRP) gives it a performance per dollar of 114.62. This is the 10th best in value for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
General Info
General overview of the GPU, including details like its manufacturer, release date, launch price, and current production status.
| Info | Radeon R7 370 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | AMD | NVIDIA |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Turing |
| Market Segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release Date | Q2 2015 | Q4 2019 |
| Launch Price (MSRP) | $149 | $159 |
| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |
| Shop | Check Price | Check Price |
Gaming Performance
#
Select a game to compare FPS metrics
Black Myth: Wukong
Once Human
The First Descendant
F1 24
Senua's Saga Hellblade 2
Ghost of Tsushima
Dragon's Dogma 2
FPS Benchmarks
This table showcases the average frame rate (FPS) achieved both GPUs in at various resolutions. Frame rate is a crucial indicator of how smoothly the GPU can run the game. A higher FPS generally translates to a smoother gameplay experience.
- Frames Per Second
Black Myth: Wukong | Radeon R7 370 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| Low - 1080p | -- | 37 FPS |
| Medium - 1080p | -- | 22 FPS |
| High - 1080p | -- | 15 FPS |
| Ultra - 1080p | -- | 5 FPS |
| QHD - 1440p | -- | -- |
| 4K UHD - 2160p | -- | -- |
FPS Source: Notebookcheck
Compare Frames Per Second (FPS)
The average frame rate (FPS) in can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative performance. Generally, higher FPS results in a smoother gameplay experience.
Choose Baseline GPU:Radeon R7 370 orGeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
| GPU | Frames Per Second | |
|---|---|---|
| GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER | 19 | +280% |
| GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER | 13 | +160% |
| GeForce GTX 1660 | 11 | +120% |
| GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER | 5 | |
Compare Cost Per Frame
The average cost per frame in can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative value. Generally, a lower cost per frame implies better value for your money.
Choose Baseline GPU:Radeon R7 370 orGeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
| GPU | Cost Per Frame | |
|---|---|---|
| GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER | 17.62 | -45% |
| GeForce GTX 1660 | 19.91 | -37% |
| GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER | 21 | -34% |
| GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER | 31.8 | |
Benchmark Performance
#
Performance
Radeon R7 370
8,518.58% of 104,598
GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER114% better
18,224.517% of 104,598
The GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER has 114% better performance than the Radeon R7 370 for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
The Radeon R7 370 is ranked 196th with a score of 8,518.5, and the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is ranked 119th with a score of 18,224.5.
Performance per dollar
Radeon R7 370
57.1735% of 161.45
GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER100% better
114.6271% of 161.45
The GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER has 100% better value for the money than the Radeon R7 370 for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
The Radeon R7 370 is ranked 59th with a performance per dollar of 57.17, and the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is ranked 10th with a performance per dollar of 114.62.
Relative Performance
The average score in the benchmark test can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative performance. Generally, powerful GPUs tend to have higher scores.
Choose Baseline GPU:Radeon R7 370 or
| GPU | Benchmark Performance | |
|---|---|---|
| Radeon RX 5500 XT | 19,499 | +129% |
| Radeon RX 570 | 18,967 | +123% |
| GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER | 18,224.5 | +114% |
| Radeon R9 390X | 17,944 | +111% |
| Radeon RX 480 | 17,919 | +110% |
| GeForce GTX 590 | 9,166.5 | +8% |
| GeForce GTX 1050 | 8,571 | +1% |
| Radeon R7 370 | 8,518.5 | |
| GeForce GTX 660 Ti | 8,415 | -1% |
| GeForce GTX 950 | 8,351 | -2% |
Relative Value For Money
The average performance per dollar in the benchmark test can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative value. A higher score implies a better value for your money.
Choose Baseline GPU:Radeon R7 370 or
| GPU | Performance Per Dollar | |
|---|---|---|
| Radeon RX 5500 XT | 115.38 | +102% |
| Radeon RX 6500 XT | 115.35 | +102% |
| GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER | 114.62 | +100% |
| Radeon RX 570 | 112.23 | +96% |
| Radeon RX 5600 XT | 112.22 | +96% |
| GeForce GT 1030 | 59.84 | +5% |
| GeForce GTX 1060 (6 GB) | 58.2 | +2% |
| Radeon R7 370 | 57.17 | |
| GeForce GTX 960 | 54.11 | -5% |
| GeForce GTX 950 | 52.52 | -8% |
Benchmark Scores
This table showcases the average performance scores achieved by both GPUs across industry-standard benchmark tests. These scores provide a valuable insight into overall performance. Powerful GPUs tend to have higher scores.
- Popular
| Benchmark | Radeon R7 370 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| 3DMark Time Spy Graphics | 1,442 | 4,633 (+221.29%) |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | 1,606 | 5,202.5 (+223.94%) |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Graphics | 39,808.5 | 68,198.5 (+71.32%) |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Graphics | 5,961 | 12,206 (+104.76%) |
| 3DMark Night Raid Graphics | -- | 56,328 |
| 3DMark 11 Performance Score | 8,866 | 19,053 (+114.9%) |
| PassMark G3D Mark | 4,512 | 10,163 (+125.24%) |
| PassMark G2D Mark | 599 | 752 (+25.54%) |
Benchmarks Source: Notebookcheck
Technical Specs
#
Graphics Processor
General information about the graphics processing unit like their architecture, manufacturing process size, and transistor count. Newer GPU architectures generally bring efficiency improvements and may introduce technologies that enhance graphical capabilities.
| Spec | Radeon R7 370 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| Codename | Trinidad | TU116 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Turing |
| Process Size | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Transistors | 2,800 million | 6,600 million |
Memory Details
Memory specifications like their capacity, bandwidth, and clock speeds. GPU memory stores graphics data like frames, textures, and shadows which helps display rendered images. These specs are crucial for graphics-intense applications like gaming and 3D modeling.
| Spec | Radeon R7 370 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| Memory Size | 2 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 179.2 Gb/s | 192 Gb/s |
| Memory Clock | 1,400 MHz | 1,500 MHz |
| Memory Interface | 256 bit | 128 bit |
| L1 Cache | 16 KB | 64 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 1,024 KB |
Board Compatibility
Compatibility information like their slot size, bus interface, power consumption, and display support. These specs are useful for verifying compatibility with your motherboard, power supply, and monitor.
| Spec | Radeon R7 370 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| Slots | 2 slots | 2 slots |
| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 110 W | 100 W |
| Suggested PSU | 300 W | 300 W |
| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | 1x 6-pin |
| Outputs | DVI, HDMI 1.4a, DisplayPort 1.2 | DVI, HDMI 2.0, DisplayPort 1.4a |
Cores & Clock Speeds
Processing power information like its cores and clock speed. These specs impact how fast they can process graphics. Each type of core or component serves a specific computational purpose.
| Spec | Radeon R7 370 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| Stream Processors (SP) | 1,024 | -- |
| CUDA Cores | -- | 1,280 |
| Compute Units (CU) | 16 | -- |
| Stream Multiprocessors (SM) | -- | 20 |
| Texture Mapping Units (TMU) | 64 | 80 |
| Render Output Units (ROP) | 32 | 32 |
| Core Clock Speed | 925 MHz | 1,530 MHz |
| Core Clock Speed (Boost) | 975 MHz | 1,725 MHz |
Theoretical Performance
Theoretical performance numbers derived from the raw specifications of the different components like core count and clock speeds. While these provide a glimpse into peak processing power, they do not represent real-world performance.
| Spec | Radeon R7 370 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| Pixel Fill Rate | 31.2 GPixel/s | 55.2 GPixel/s |
| Texture Fill Rate | 62.4 GTexel/s | 138 GTexel/s |
| FP32 Performance | 2 TFLOPS | 4.42 TFLOPS |
| FP64 Performance | 124.8 GFLOPS | 138 GFLOPS |
API Support
Graphics API versions supported by these graphics cards. APIs evolve over time, introducing new features and functionalities. Older GPUs may not support recent versions.
| Spec | Radeon R7 370 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| OpenCL | 2.1 (1.2) | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.5 (5.1) | 6.8 |
Check out these comparisons for similar GPUs:
Looking for alternatives? Check out these similar GPUs:
* Performance rating, performance per dollar, and rankings are based on the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark and MSRP.