Radeon R7 240 vs R9 370

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 370 and Radeon R7 240, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 370
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 110 Watt
12.24
+425%

R9 370 outperforms R7 240 by a whopping 425% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking400844
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.16
Power efficiency7.695.37
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameTrinidadOland
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date5 May 2015 (9 years ago)8 October 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$69

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores1280320
Core clock speed925 MHzno data
Boost clock speed975 MHz780 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 million950 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)110 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate78.0014.00
Floating-point processing power2.496 TFLOPS0.448 TFLOPS
ROPs328
TMUs8020

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 x8
Length221 mm168 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinN/A

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 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1400 MHz1150 MHz
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s72 GB/s

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 DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMI++

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire-+
FreeSync-+
DDMA audiono data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)DirectX® 12
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.131-

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 12.24
+425%
R7 240 2.33

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
+426%
R7 240 898

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
+330%
R7 240 1220

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
+463%
8−9
−463%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data8.63

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 12.24 2.33
Recency 5 May 2015 8 October 2013
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 110 Watt 50 Watt

R9 370 has a 425.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

R7 240, on the other hand, has 120% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 370 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 240 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 R9 370
Radeon R9 370
AMD Radeon R7 240
Radeon R7 240

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.


4.1 402 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 1166 votes

Rate Radeon R7 240 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.