AMD Radeon HD 6950 vs AMD Radeon R7 M370 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M370 wins the only head-to-head benchmark. It scores 7,063 points versus 6,210 for the AMD Radeon HD 6950, a 13.7% advantage.

Q: How does the R7 M370 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The R7 M370 sits between the AMD FirePro M5100 (6,830, 1% slower) and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 (6,698, 1% faster). Its average benchmark score is 6,764, placing it in the 38th percentile of all GPUs.

Q: Where does the HD 6950 rank among all GPUs?

A: The HD 6950 has an average benchmark score of 6,210, placing it in the 36th percentile. Its closest competitor is the AMD FirePro W600 at 6,223, which is 0.2% slower.

Q: What API levels does each GPU support?

A: The R7 M370 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The HD 6950 supports DirectX 11.2 (11_0), OpenGL 4.4, and has no Vulkan support listed.

Q: Which GPU has the higher transistor count?

A: The HD 6950 uses 2,640 million transistors on a 389 mm² die. The R7 M370 uses 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth figures for each card?

A: The HD 6950 offers 160.0 GB/s through a 256-bit bus, while the R7 M370 provides 57.60 GB/s through a 128-bit bus. Both have 2 GB of GDDR5 memory.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent fundamentally different design philosophies from AMD. The R7 M370 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture on a 28 nm process, while the HD 6950 uses the older TeraScale 3 architecture on a 40 nm process. This generational gap is stark: the R7 M370 packs 12.3 million transistors per square millimeter, nearly double the HD 6950's density of 6.8M / mm².

The chip designs diverge dramatically. The R7 M370 is built on the "Litho" chip with 950 million transistors across a compact 77 mm² die. The HD 6950 uses the "Cayman" chip with 2,640 million transistors spread across a massive 389 mm² die. This means the HD 6950 has nearly three times the raw transistor budget, but the R7 M370 achieves higher efficiency per transistor.

The shading resources tell a similar story. The HD 6950 fields 1,408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The R7 M370 counters with 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Despite having fewer than a third of the shading units, the R7 M370 still outperforms in compute workloads, suggesting architectural efficiency gains from GCN 1.0 over TeraScale 3.

The R7 M370 comes with modern API support that the HD 6950 lacks entirely. DirectX 12 (11_1) versus 11.2 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6 versus 4.4, and Vulkan 1.2.170 versus no Vulkan support at all. The HD 6950 is a product of the Northern Islands generation, while the R7 M370 belongs to the Gem System (R7 M300) generation. The HD 6950's predecessor is "Evergreen" and its successor is "Southern Islands"; the R7 M370's predecessor is "Solar System" and its successor is "Polaris Mobile."

Bus interface differences also emerge. The R7 M370 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the HD 6950 uses PCIe 2.0 x16. The newer PCIe 3.0 standard offers higher per-lane bandwidth, which partially compensates for the narrower x8 configuration.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole head-to-head benchmark result is decisive. In Geekbench OpenCL, the R7 M370 scores 7,063 against the HD 6950's 6,210. That is a 13.7% delta in favor of the newer card. This result is remarkable given the HD 6950's massive hardware advantage on paper.

Consider the fill rate numbers. The HD 6950 produces 25.60 GPixel/s and 70.40 GTexel/s. The R7 M370 manages 7.680 GPixel/s and 23.04 GTexel/s. The HD 6950 has more than triple the pixel throughput and texture throughput. Yet in the OpenCL compute benchmark, the R7 M370 pulls ahead by double digits. The data suggests that raw fill rates do not translate directly into compute performance.

Floating-point performance follows the same pattern. The HD 6950 delivers 2.253 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. The R7 M370 delivers 737.3 GFLOPS, which is roughly one-third. The R7 M370's average benchmark score of 6,764 versus the HD 6950's 6,210 shows that the newer architecture extracts more useful work per FLOP.

The memory subsystem also favors the HD 6950 on paper. Its 160.0 GB/s bandwidth is nearly three times the R7 M370's 57.60 GB/s. The 256-bit bus versus 128-bit bus is a major theoretical advantage. Yet the benchmark outcome flips the script, implying that the R7 M370's memory efficiency and architectural optimizations compensate for the bandwidth deficit.

The R7 M370 also benefits from a boost clock of 960 MHz with a base of 875 MHz. The HD 6950 has no listed base or boost clocks, only a memory clock of 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The R7 M370's memory runs at 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective). These clock differences are secondary to the architectural divide.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon R7 M370 | AMD Radeon HD 6950 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | TeraScale 3 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 40 nm |

| Transistors | 950 million | 2,640 million |

| Die Size | 77 mm² | 389 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.3M / mm² | 6.8M / mm² |

| Shading Units | 384 | 1,408 |

| TMUs | 24 | 88 |

| ROPs | 8 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 7.680 GPixel/s | 25.60 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 23.04 GTexel/s | 70.40 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 737.3 GFLOPS | 2.253 TFLOPS |

| Memory Clock | 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps) | 1250 MHz (5 Gbps) |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 57.60 GB/s | 160.0 GB/s |

| TDP | Not listed | 200 W |

| Slot Width | Not listed | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | Not listed | 2x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 550 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Not listed | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_1) | 11.2 (11_0) |

| OpenGL Support | 4.6 | 4.4 |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.170 | None |

| Dimensions | Not listed | 286 mm x 126 mm x 42 mm |

| Release Date | 2015-05-04 | 2010-12-13 |

| Launch MSRP | Not available | 299 USD |

The specification table reveals two cards from different eras. The HD 6950 is physically massive, requiring a dual-slot cooler, two 6-pin power connectors, and a 550 W suggested PSU. It draws 200 W according to its TDP. The R7 M370 lists no TDP, no power connectors, and no slot width, suggesting a much more modest power footprint designed for mobile integration.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion: the AMD Radeon R7 M370 is the better performer in compute benchmarks despite having dramatically inferior specifications on paper. The 13.7% OpenCL win over the HD 6950, combined with the R7 M370's 38th percentile ranking versus the HD 6950's 36th, shows that architectural efficiency trumps raw hardware resources in this matchup.

The R7 M370 also offers modern API support that the HD 6950 cannot match. DirectX 12, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170 make the R7 M370 compatible with contemporary software ecosystems. The HD 6950 is locked to DirectX 11.2 and OpenGL 4.4 with no Vulkan path. For anyone considering these cards today, the R7 M370 is the only one that can run modern compute workloads.

The HD 6950 does have advantages in specific hardware categories. Its 160.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, 2.253 TFLOPS FP32, and 25.60 GPixel/s pixel rate are all far superior. But the benchmark data shows these advantages do not translate into better Geekbench OpenCL scores. The HD 6950's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 and RTX 5070 Ti SUPER, both at 6,270 (0.9% faster), which is an unusual grouping that highlights how the HD 6950's score clusters with much newer cards.

For consumers, the R7 M370 is the sensible choice based on the available data. It wins the only benchmark, supports newer APIs, and comes from a much more recent release date of 2015-05-04 versus 2010-12-13. The HD 6950's launch MSRP was 299 USD, but that figure has no bearing on current performance comparisons.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R7 M370 wins in compute performance, which is the only benchmark category measured. Its 7,063 OpenCL score beats the HD 6950's 6,210 by 13.7%. It also wins decisively in API support, offering DirectX 12, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. For any workload that relies on modern compute APIs — OpenCL, Vulkan compute, or DirectX 12 compute — the R7 M370 is the clear winner.

The HD 6950 wins in raw hardware specifications that do not appear in the benchmark results. It has 3.67x the shading units, 3.67x the TMUs, and 4x the ROPs of the R7 M370. Its memory bandwidth of 160.0 GB/s is 2.78x higher. Its FP32 throughput of 2.253 TFLOPS is 3.06x higher. These numbers suggest the HD 6950 could excel in workloads that stress fill rate or memory bandwidth, such as certain gaming scenarios or texture-heavy applications, though no such benchmarks are in the data.

The HD 6950 also wins in display output flexibility. It offers 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 connections. The R7 M370 lists no display outputs at all. For multi-monitor setups, the HD 6950 provides more options out of the box.

The R7 M370 wins in efficiency-related metrics. Its 28 nm process and 12.3M / mm² transistor density produce higher performance per transistor. The absence of a listed TDP, power connectors, or PSU requirement suggests it can operate within much tighter power envelopes. The HD 6950's 200 W TDP and 550 W suggested PSU place it in a different power class entirely.

For mobile or compact systems, the R7 M370 is the only viable option. The HD 6950's physical dimensions of 286 mm x 126 mm x 42 mm and dual-slot design require a full desktop chassis. The R7 M370's lack of dimension data implies a form factor designed for integration rather than expansion slots.