Radeon Pro 5300M vs R9 370

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 370 with Radeon Pro 5300M, including specs and performance data.

R9 370
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 110 Watt
12.28

Pro 5300M outperforms R9 370 by a significant 27% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking406346
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency7.6812.62
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)
GPU code nameTrinidadNavi 14
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date5 May 2015 (9 years ago)13 November 2019 (5 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 cores12801280
Core clock speed925 MHz1000 MHz
Boost clock speed975 MHz1250 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 million6,400 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)110 Watt85 Watt
Texture fill rate78.00100.0
Floating-point processing power2.496 TFLOPS3.2 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs8080

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 4.0 x8
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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1400 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s192.0 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 DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131

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.

R9 370 12.28
Pro 5300M 15.58
+26.9%

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
Pro 5300M 5989
+26.8%

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
−22.2%
55−60
+22.2%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Elden Ring 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Dota 2 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Elden Ring 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Fortnite 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
World of Tanks 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Dota 2 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Elden Ring 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
World of Tanks 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Elden Ring 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

This is how R9 370 and Pro 5300M compete in popular games:

  • Pro 5300M is 22% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 12.28 15.58
Recency 5 May 2015 13 November 2019
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 110 Watt 85 Watt

Pro 5300M has a 26.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 29.4% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro 5300M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 370 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 370 is a desktop card while Radeon Pro 5300M is a mobile workstation one.


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 R9 370
Radeon R9 370
AMD Radeon Pro 5300M
Radeon Pro 5300M

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.


4 424 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 172 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 5300M 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.