Radeon R7 260X vs R7 370

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 370 and Radeon R7 260X, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R7 370
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 110 Watt
11.69
+41.5%

R7 370 outperforms R7 260X by a considerable 42% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking407504
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.443.38
Power efficiency7.415.01
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code nameTrinidadBonaire
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferencereference
Release date18 June 2015 (9 years ago)8 October 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 $139

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R7 370 has 91% better value for money than R7 260X.

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 cores1024896
Boost clock speed975 MHz1000 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 million2,080 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)110 Watt115 Watt
Texture fill rate62.4061.60
Floating-point processing power1.997 TFLOPS1.971 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs6456

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 supportPCIe 3.0PCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length152 mm170 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1 x 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 amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed975 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s104 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, 1x DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Eyefinity++
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
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 audio++

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 12DirectX® 12
Shader Model5.16.3
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.0
Vulkan+-
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.

R7 370 11.69
+41.5%
R7 260X 8.26

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.

R7 370 4510
+41.5%
R7 260X 3188

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.

R7 370 5961
+36.1%
R7 260X 4380

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
+50%
30−35
−50%
1440p62
+55%
40−45
−55%
4K20
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.314.63
1440p2.403.48
4K7.459.93

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+50%
18−20
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+54.2%
24−27
−54.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+50%
18−20
−50%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+41.8%
55−60
−41.8%
Hitman 3 21−24
+57.1%
14−16
−57.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
+55%
40−45
−55%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+58.3%
24−27
−58.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+58.3%
24−27
−58.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+51.1%
45−50
−51.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+50%
18−20
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+54.2%
24−27
−54.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+50%
18−20
−50%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+41.8%
55−60
−41.8%
Hitman 3 21−24
+57.1%
14−16
−57.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
+55%
40−45
−55%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+58.3%
24−27
−58.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+58.3%
24−27
−58.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 89
+48.3%
60−65
−48.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+51.1%
45−50
−51.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+50%
18−20
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+50%
18−20
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+41.8%
55−60
−41.8%
Hitman 3 21−24
+57.1%
14−16
−57.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
+55%
40−45
−55%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+58.3%
24−27
−58.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22
+57.1%
14−16
−57.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+51.1%
45−50
−51.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+43.8%
16−18
−43.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+60%
35−40
−60%
Hitman 3 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+58.3%
12−14
−58.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+46%
50−55
−46%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+58.3%
12−14
−58.3%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Hitman 3 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+54.3%
35−40
−54.3%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%

This is how R7 370 and R7 260X compete in popular games:

  • R7 370 is 50% faster in 1080p
  • R7 370 is 55% faster in 1440p
  • R7 370 is 43% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.69 8.26
Recency 18 June 2015 8 October 2013
Power consumption (TDP) 110 Watt 115 Watt

R7 370 has a 41.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and 4.5% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R7 370 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 260X 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 R7 370
Radeon R7 370
AMD Radeon R7 260X
Radeon R7 260X

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.


4 454 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 392 votes

Rate Radeon R7 260X 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.