AMD Radeon R7 M370 vs NVIDIA Quadro K620 Comparison

The AMD Radeon R7 M370 and NVIDIA Quadro K620 are both end-of-life, 28 nm mobile and desktop workstation graphics solutions, respectively, that occupy a similar performance tier despite their different design goals. Benchmark data shows the AMD part holds a lead in both recorded tests, but the NVIDIA card counters with superior specification efficiency in several key areas. The data paints a picture of two GPUs that trade blows depending on the workload, with the R7 M370 leaning toward compute-oriented tasks and the K620 offering a more balanced, power-conscious profile.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results clearly favor the AMD Radeon R7 M370 in both available tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the R7 M370 scores 7063 against the Quadro K620’s 6693, a 5.5% advantage. The gap widens in Geekbench Vulkan, where the R7 M370 scores 6465 compared to 5870, a more substantial 10.1% lead. This suggests the AMD architecture, despite its older GCN 1.0 design, handles heterogeneous compute workloads more effectively, particularly when leveraging the Vulkan API.

However, the Quadro K620 wins on pure specification efficiency. Its pixel rate is 17.98 GPixel/s versus the R7 M370’s 7.680 GPixel/s, a massive 134% advantage. This indicates the NVIDIA card is significantly better at fill-rate-bound tasks, such as traditional rasterization and basic 2D/3D rendering. The K620 also has double the ROPs (16 vs 8), which directly supports its superior pixel throughput.

The K620’s texture rate is also higher at 26.98 GTexel/s versus 23.04 GTexel/s, a 17% lead. This, combined with its higher boost clock of 1124 MHz versus 960 MHz, suggests that for geometry and texture-heavy applications, the NVIDIA card is the stronger performer. In summary, the R7 M370 wins on compute API benchmarks, while the K620 wins on raw rasterization throughput.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on different architectural philosophies. The AMD Radeon R7 M370 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture, a design from 2011 that has been iterated upon heavily. Its chip is codenamed "Litho" and is fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, housing 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 12.3M per mm². The architecture supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

In contrast, the NVIDIA Quadro K620 uses the Maxwell architecture, built on the GM107 chip. It is also fabricated on a 28 nm TSMC process, but packs 1,870 million transistors on a much larger 148 mm² die, resulting in a slightly higher transistor density of 12.6M per mm². The Maxwell architecture is known for its power efficiency and strong rasterization performance. It supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and a newer Vulkan 1.4 API.

The memory subsystems differ significantly. The AMD card uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 57.60 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA card also has 2 GB, but uses DDR3 on the same 128-bit bus, yielding only 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth — exactly half. This is a critical difference, as the R7 M370’s higher bandwidth should benefit compute workloads that are memory-bound.

Both have the same number of shading units (384) and texture mapping units (24), but the key architectural difference lies in the ROP count and clock speeds. The K620 has 16 ROPs and a base clock of 1058 MHz, while the R7 M370 has only 8 ROPs and a base clock of 875 MHz. This explains the K620’s dominance in pixel processing.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the data, the choice depends entirely on the workload. For users prioritizing compute performance in OpenCL or Vulkan environments, the AMD Radeon R7 M370 is the clear winner. Its 5.5% lead in OpenCL and 10.1% lead in Vulkan are not marginal; they represent a consistent advantage that would translate to faster processing in GPU-accelerated applications that utilize these APIs.

For users focused on traditional graphics rendering, particularly tasks involving high pixel fill rates or texture throughput, the NVIDIA Quadro K620 is the superior card. Its 134% higher pixel rate and 17% higher texture rate are decisive advantages that would make it the better choice for CAD viewports, 2D rendering, or any workload where the GPU is pushing pixels rather than computing general-purpose math.

The K620 also offers a lower power profile with a 45 W TDP, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of just 200 W. It is a single-slot card measuring 160 mm in length. The R7 M370 does not have TDP or physical dimensions listed in the data, making a direct power comparison impossible, but the K620’s specifications clearly indicate a low-power, low-footprint design. The data shows the R7 M370 wins the compute battle, but the K620 wins the rasterization and efficiency war.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M370 has an average benchmark score of 6764, while the NVIDIA Quadro K620 has an average score of 6282. This puts the AMD card roughly 7.7% ahead in overall average performance.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Vulkan performance?

A: In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the AMD Radeon R7 M370 scores 6465, which is 10.1% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro K620’s score of 5870. This is the largest performance gap between the two in any benchmark.

Q: What is the difference in pixel fill rate?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K620 has a pixel rate of 17.98 GPixel/s, which is significantly higher than the AMD Radeon R7 M370’s 7.680 GPixel/s. The K620’s advantage is approximately 134%.

Q: Do both cards have the same amount of memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Radeon R7 M370 and the NVIDIA Quadro K620 come with 2 GB of memory. However, the AMD card uses faster GDDR5 memory while the NVIDIA card uses DDR3.

Q: Which card supports a newer version of Vulkan?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K620 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the AMD Radeon R7 M370 supports Vulkan 1.2.170. Despite this, the AMD card scores higher in the Geekbench Vulkan test.

Q: How does the transistor count compare between the two?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K620 has 1,870 million transistors, which is nearly double the AMD Radeon R7 M370’s 950 million. The K620 also has a larger die size at 148 mm² compared to 77 mm².

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two recorded benchmarks show a consistent pattern of AMD dominance in compute workloads. The first test, Geekbench OpenCL, pits the R7 M370's 7063 score against the K620's 6693. This 5.5% delta is substantial and suggests that the AMD card's higher memory bandwidth (57.60 GB/s vs 28.80 GB/s) plays a significant role. OpenCL workloads often are memory-bound, and the R7 M370 has exactly double the bandwidth of the K620. This is likely the primary reason for the AMD card’s victory in this test.

The second test, Geekbench Vulkan, shows an even larger gap. The R7 M370 scores 6465, while the K620 scores 5870, resulting in a 10.1% delta. This is interesting because the K620 supports a newer Vulkan API version (1.4 vs 1.2.170). Despite this software advantage, the AMD hardware still wins by a wide margin. This indicates that the underlying compute architecture of the R7 M370 is more efficient for general-purpose GPU computing, or that the Vulkan driver implementation for GCN 1.0 is particularly well-optimized.

The K620’s closest rival in the data is not the R7 M370, but rather the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER, which has an average score of 6270 (a 0.2% delta). This is a peculiar comparison, as the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER is a modern, high-end card. The data suggests that the K620’s average benchmark score of 6282 places it in a similar performance bracket, which is surprising given the generational gap. The R7 M370, on the other hand, sits closest to the AMD FirePro M5100 (6830, delta -1%) and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M (6946, delta -2.6%), indicating its performance level is more aligned with mid-range mobile GPUs from the same era.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in almost every measurable specification except for memory size, shading units, and TMUs. The core architectural differences are:

• Chip: The AMD R7 M370 uses "Litho" (GCN 1.0), while the NVIDIA K620 uses "GM107" (Maxwell).
• Process Node: Both use 28 nm, but the AMD chip has 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, while the NVIDIA chip has 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die.
• Clocks: The AMD card has a base clock of 875 MHz and boost of 960 MHz. The NVIDIA card has a base clock of 1058 MHz and boost of 1124 MHz.
• Memory: Both have 2 GB, but the AMD uses GDDR5 at 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective) for 57.60 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA uses DDR3 at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) for 28.80 GB/s bandwidth.
• ROPs: The AMD card has 8, while the NVIDIA card has 16.
• Pixel Rate: The AMD card is 7.680 GPixel/s, while the NVIDIA card is 17.98 GPixel/s.
• Texture Rate: The AMD card is 23.04 GTexel/s, while the NVIDIA card is 26.98 GTexel/s.
• FP32 Performance: The AMD card is 737.3 GFLOPS, while the NVIDIA card is 863.2 GFLOPS.
• TDP: The NVIDIA card is rated at 45 W, with no power connectors and a 200 W suggested PSU. The AMD card has no TDP listed.
• Bus Interface: The AMD card uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the NVIDIA uses PCIe 2.0 x16.
• Display Outputs: The NVIDIA card has 1x DVI and 1x DisplayPort 1.2. The AMD card has no listed outputs.
• API Support: The AMD card supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA card supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.
• Physical Dimensions: The NVIDIA card is 160 mm long and 69 mm high, single-slot. The AMD card has no listed dimensions.
• Release Date: The AMD card was released on May 4, 2015, while the NVIDIA card was released on July 21, 2014.