AMD Radeon R7 370 vs NVIDIA Quadro 5000M
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R7 370 and NVIDIA Quadro 5000M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R7 370
- Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 10 month(s) later
- 3.9x more texture fill rate: 62.4 GTexel / s vs 16.2 GTexel / s
- 3.2x more pipelines: 1024 vs 320
- 3.9x better floating-point performance: 1,997 gflops vs 518.4 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
- 2.3x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 1792 MB
- 2.2x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 4511 vs 2060
- Around 42% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 606 vs 426
- 3.8x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 86561 vs 23008
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 18 June 2015 vs 27 July 2010 |
Texture fill rate | 62.4 GTexel / s vs 16.2 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 1024 vs 320 |
Floating-point performance | 1,997 gflops vs 518.4 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 40 nm |
Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 1792 MB |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 4511 vs 2060 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 606 vs 426 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 86561 vs 23008 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro 5000M
- Around 10% lower typical power consumption: 100 Watt vs 110 Watt
- 2.5x more memory clock speed: 2400 MHz vs 975 MHz
- Around 42% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 5249 vs 3707
- 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 7205 vs 3359
- Around 42% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 5249 vs 3707
- 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 7205 vs 3359
Specifications (specs) | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt vs 110 Watt |
Memory clock speed | 2400 MHz vs 975 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 5249 vs 3707 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 7205 vs 3359 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 5249 vs 3707 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 7205 vs 3359 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 370
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro 5000M
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon R7 370 | NVIDIA Quadro 5000M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 4511 | 2060 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 606 | 426 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 86561 | 23008 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 72.514 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1506.404 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 7.267 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 116.279 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 359.237 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7102 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3707 | 5249 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3359 | 7205 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7102 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3707 | 5249 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3359 | 7205 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1499 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon R7 370 | NVIDIA Quadro 5000M | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Fermi |
Code name | Trinidad | GF100 |
Design | AMD Radeon R7 300 Series | |
Launch date | 18 June 2015 | 27 July 2010 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $149 | |
Place in performance rating | 420 | 419 |
Type | Desktop | Mobile workstation |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 975 MHz | |
Floating-point performance | 1,997 gflops | 518.4 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 1024 | 320 |
Stream Processors | 1024 | |
Texture fill rate | 62.4 GTexel / s | 16.2 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 110 Watt | 100 Watt |
Transistor count | 2,800 million | 3,100 million |
Core clock speed | 405 MHz | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
DisplayPort support | ||
Dual-link DVI support | ||
Eyefinity | ||
HDMI | ||
Number of Eyefinity displays | 6 | |
VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
Length | 152 mm | |
Supplementary power connectors | 1 x 6-pin | |
Laptop size | large | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (11_0) |
Mantle | ||
OpenCL | 2.0 | |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 1792 MB |
Memory bandwidth | 179.2 GB/s | 76.8 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 256 bit | 256 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 975 MHz | 2400 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
AppAcceleration | ||
CrossFire | ||
DDMA audio | ||
FreeSync | ||
TrueAudio | ||
Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
CUDA | ||
DirectCompute | ||
DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
ECC (Error Correcting Code) |