Quadro FX 370M vs Radeon RX 6900 XT

Place in the ranking	23	1366
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	29.94	no data
Power efficiency	15.99	0.83
Architecture	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	Navi 21	G98
Market segment	Desktop	Mobile workstation
Release date	28 October 2020 (4 years ago)	15 August 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$999	no data

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 cores	5120	8
Core clock speed	1825 MHz	550 MHz
Boost clock speed	2250 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	26,800 million	210 million
Manufacturing process technology	7 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	300 Watt	20 Watt
Texture fill rate	720.0	2.200
Floating-point processing power	23.04 TFLOPS	0.0224 TFLOPS
ROPs	128	4
TMUs	320	4
Ray Tracing Cores	80	no data

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).

Interface	PCIe 4.0 x16	MXM-II
Length	267 mm	no data
Width	3-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	2x 8-pin	no data

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 type	GDDR6	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	16 GB	256 MB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	2000 MHz	600 MHz
Memory bandwidth	512.0 GB/s	9.6 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 Connectors	1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C	No outputs
HDMI	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_2)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	6.5	4.0
OpenGL	4.6	3.3
OpenCL	2.1	1.1
Vulkan	1.2	N/A
CUDA	-	1.1

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.

RX 6900 XT 69.54
+28875%

FX 370M 0.24

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.

RX 6900 XT 26739
+28652%

FX 370M 93

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 HD	188	0−1
1440p	130	-0−1
4K	81	-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p	5.31	no data
1440p	7.68	no data
4K	12.33	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	160−170 +1950%	8−9 −1950%
Cyberpunk 2077	160−170 +7900%	2−3 −7900%
Elden Ring	260−270	0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	110−120	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	160−170 +1950%	8−9 −1950%
Cyberpunk 2077	76 +3700%	2−3 −3700%
Forza Horizon 4	350−400 +7680%	5−6 −7680%
Metro Exodus	126	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	120−130 +3075%	4−5 −3075%
Valorant	480 +47900%	1−2 −47900%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	110−120	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	160−170 +1950%	8−9 −1950%
Cyberpunk 2077	64 +3100%	2−3 −3100%
Dota 2	160−170	0−1
Elden Ring	260−270	0−1
Far Cry 5	130−140 +2100%	6−7 −2100%
Fortnite	270−280	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	350−400 +7680%	5−6 −7680%
Grand Theft Auto V	160−170	0−1
Metro Exodus	123	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	210−220 +3483%	6−7 −3483%
Red Dead Redemption 2	124 +3000%	4−5 −3000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	170−180 +4250%	4−5 −4250%
Valorant	300−350 +34700%	1−2 −34700%
World of Tanks	270−280 +2225%	12−14 −2225%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	110−120	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	160−170 +1950%	8−9 −1950%
Cyberpunk 2077	53 +2550%	2−3 −2550%
Dota 2	160−170	0−1
Far Cry 5	130−140 +2100%	6−7 −2100%
Forza Horizon 4	350−400 +7680%	5−6 −7680%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	210−220 +3483%	6−7 −3483%
Valorant	411 +41000%	1−2 −41000%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	130−140	0−1
Elden Ring	180−190	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	130−140	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +17400%	1−2 −17400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	82	0−1
World of Tanks	450−500 +48700%	1−2 −48700%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	90−95 +933%	9−10 −933%
Cyberpunk 2077	36 +1700%	2−3 −1700%
Far Cry 5	160−170 +3900%	4−5 −3900%
Forza Horizon 4	250−260	0−1
Metro Exodus	117	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	150−160 +7600%	2−3 −7600%
Valorant	328 +8100%	4−5 −8100%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	85−90	0−1
Dota 2	150−160 +940%	14−16 −940%
Elden Ring	95−100	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	150−160 +940%	14−16 −940%
Metro Exodus	67	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	200−210	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	55	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	150−160 +940%	14−16 −940%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	90−95	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	85−90	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	17 +1600%	1−2 −1600%
Dota 2	150−160 +940%	14−16 −940%
Far Cry 5	100−110	0−1
Fortnite	95−100	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	130−140	0−1
Valorant	185	0−1

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

in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RX 6900 XT is 17400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, RX 6900 XT surpassed FX 370M in all 30 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	69.54	0.24
Recency	28 October 2020	15 August 2008
Maximum RAM amount	16 GB	256 MB
Chip lithography	7 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	300 Watt	20 Watt

RX 6900 XT has a 28875% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 828.6% more advanced lithography process.

FX 370M, on the other hand, has 1400% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6900 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 370M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX 6900 XT is a desktop card while Quadro FX 370M 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.