AMD Radeon R9 370X vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770 Comparison

# Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits this pairing cleanly by API generation. The AMD Radeon R9 370X wins two of the three head-to-head tests, taking Geekbench Metal and OpenCL decisively. Its Metal score of 12,676 beats the GTX 770's 9,369 by 35.3%, and its OpenCL result of 25,893 versus 15,707 represents a 64.9% advantage. Those are not marginal leads—the R9 370X is substantially faster in compute-oriented workloads that rely on these APIs.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770, however, owns the Vulkan test outright. It scores 19,166 against the R9 370X's 9,018, a 52.9% swing in NVIDIA's favor. This is the single largest margin in either direction across the entire comparison, and it flips the overall narrative. If your workload leans on Vulkan, the GTX 770 is not just ahead—it is in a different performance tier.

Looking at aggregate scores, the R9 370X averages 15,862 across all benchmarks versus 14,747 for the GTX 770, a 7.6% overall lead. Both cards sit within a narrow band of the GPU population: the R9 370X lands at the 58th percentile, the GTX 770 at the 57th. Neither is a standout in the broader market, but the R9 370X edges ahead in overall compute capability while the GTX 770 counters with a specific API strength.

The practical takeaway is that this is not a simple "one card is faster" situation. The R9 370X wins where modern compute APIs are used, while the GTX 770 wins where Vulkan is the target. The choice depends entirely on which API the user's software prefers.

# Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural generations and design philosophies. The AMD Radeon R9 370X uses the Trinidad chip built on GCN 1.0 architecture, part of the Pirate Islands (R9 300) generation. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770 uses the GK104 chip on Kepler architecture, from the GeForce 700 generation. Both are fabricated on TSMC's 28 nm process, but the similarities end there.

The GTX 770 packs more hardware resources: 1,536 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The R9 370X has 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and the same 32 ROPs. NVIDIA's chip is also physically larger and more complex—3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, versus AMD's 2,800 million transistors on 212 mm². Transistor density slightly favors AMD at 13.2M per mm² versus 12.0M per mm², but the raw transistor count and die area go to NVIDIA.

Clock speeds favor NVIDIA as well. The GTX 770 runs at 1,046 MHz base and 1,085 MHz boost, while the R9 370X runs at 980 MHz base and 1,030 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ: the GTX 770's memory runs at 1,753 MHz (7 Gbps effective) versus the R9 370X's 1,400 MHz (5.6 Gbps effective). That higher memory clock translates directly to bandwidth—224.4 GB/s for NVIDIA versus 179.2 GB/s for AMD, despite both using 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus.

Theoretical throughput numbers favor NVIDIA across the board. The GTX 770 delivers 3.333 TFLOPS FP32, 138.9 GTexel/s texture rate, and 34.72 GPixel/s pixel rate. The R9 370X delivers 2.637 TFLOPS, 82.40 GTexel/s, and 32.96 GPixel/s. The gap is most pronounced in texture rate, where NVIDIA leads by 68.5%.

API support differs in one notable way: the R9 370X supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the GTX 770 supports DirectX 12 (11_0). OpenGL support is identical at 4.6, and Vulkan support is close—1.2.170 on AMD versus 1.2.175 on NVIDIA. Power consumption also diverges sharply, with the GTX 770 rated at 230 W TDP versus 180 W for the R9 370X, requiring a 550 W suggested PSU versus 450 W.

# The Verdict

The data supports a clear split decision. For OpenCL and Metal workloads, the AMD Radeon R9 370X is the superior choice. Its 64.9% OpenCL lead and 35.3% Metal lead are too large to ignore, and its higher average benchmark score (15,862 versus 14,747) confirms broader compute strength. The R9 370X also draws less power—180 W versus 230 W—and runs cooler in terms of system requirements, needing only a 450 W PSU versus 550 W.

For Vulkan-focused applications, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770 is the definitive winner. A 52.9% performance advantage in that specific test is overwhelming, and it suggests the Kepler architecture handles Vulkan's command structure more efficiently. Users whose primary software stack is Vulkan-based should choose the GTX 770 without hesitation.

But there are other factors. The R9 370X is physically shorter at 221 mm versus 267 mm, making it easier to fit in compact cases. The GTX 770 requires a 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connector setup, while the R9 370X uses 2x 6-pin. The R9 370X also supports DirectX 12 (11_1) versus the GTX 770's 11_0, which may matter for legacy feature compatibility. The GTX 770 launched at 399 USD, while the R9 370X launched at 199 USD—but both are end-of-life products now, so launch pricing carries limited weight.

The verdict: if compute APIs dominate your workload, pick the R9 370X. If Vulkan is your primary API, pick the GTX 770. For mixed usage, the R9 370X's higher average score and lower power draw make it the safer all-rounder.

# FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 370X averages 15,862 across all tests, versus 14,747 for the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770, a 7.6% advantage.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap?

A: The GTX 770 scores 19,166 in Geekbench Vulkan versus the R9 370X's 9,018, giving NVIDIA a 52.9% lead—the largest single-test margin in the comparison.

Q: Does the R9 370X win any compute tests?

A: Yes. It leads by 35.3% in Geekbench Metal (12,676 vs. 9,369) and by 64.9% in Geekbench OpenCL (25,893 vs. 15,707).

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The GTX 770 has 1,536 shading units, while the R9 370X has 1,280. NVIDIA also has more TMUs: 128 versus 80.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The GTX 770 delivers 224.4 GB/s bandwidth versus 179.2 GB/s for the R9 370X, a 25.2% advantage for NVIDIA.

Q: Which card requires more power?

A: The GTX 770 has a 230 W TDP and needs a 550 W suggested PSU, while the R9 370X has a 180 W TDP and needs a 450 W PSU.

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The three Geekbench tests paint a vivid picture of architectural strengths. The biggest win for the AMD Radeon R9 370X comes in OpenCL, where it scores 25,893 against the GTX 770's 15,707. That 64.9% delta is enormous—the R9 370X is nearly two-thirds faster in this compute-heavy workload. The GCN architecture's compute-oriented design clearly pays off here, as the R9 370X more than compensates for its lower theoretical FP32 throughput (2.637 TFLOPS versus 3.333 TFLOPS) with better real-world execution.

In Metal, the R9 370X again takes the lead, scoring 12,676 versus 9,369 for a 35.3% advantage. This test reinforces the pattern: AMD's architecture handles modern, low-level compute APIs more efficiently despite having fewer shading units (1,280 versus 1,536) and lower clock speeds (980 MHz base versus 1,046 MHz base). The R9 370X wins both compute-oriented tests by margins that exceed its hardware specification disadvantages.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770 answers decisively in Vulkan. Its 19,166 score crushes the R9 370X's 9,018, producing a 52.9% swing in the opposite direction. This is the most extreme result of the entire comparison, and it flips the overall benchmark split to 2–1 in AMD's favor but with NVIDIA claiming the single largest margin. Kepler's Vulkan driver stack appears to extract far more performance from the hardware than GCN 1.0 can manage.

Aggregate scores reflect the split: the R9 370X's average of 15,862 places it near the AMD Radeon RX 7700 (15,852, just 0.1% behind) and ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 (15,679, 1.2% ahead). The GTX 770's 14,747 average sits close to the NVIDIA Quadro M2000 (14,532, 1.5% ahead) but trails the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti (15,063, 2.1% behind). Both cards occupy a crowded mid-range performance band, but the R9 370X consistently lands on the higher side of that band.

# Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every measurable specification. The R9 370X uses the Trinidad chip on GCN 1.0 architecture from the Pirate Islands (R9 300) generation, while the GTX 770 uses GK104 on Kepler from the GeForce 700 generation. Both use TSMC's 28 nm process, but the R9 370X packs 2,800 million transistors on a 212 mm² die, while the GTX 770 packs 3,540 million on 294 mm². Transistor density favors AMD at 13.2M per mm² versus 12.0M per mm².

Clock speeds favor NVIDIA: 1,046 MHz base and 1,085 MHz boost versus 980 MHz and 1,030 MHz for the R9 370X. Memory clocks also favor NVIDIA at 1,753 MHz (7 Gbps effective) versus 1,400 MHz (5.6 Gbps effective). Both use 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, but bandwidth differs: 224.4 GB/s for the GTX 770 versus 179.2 GB/s for the R9 370X.

Shader resources differ significantly: the GTX 770 has 1,536 shading units and 128 TMUs, while the R9 370X has 1,280 and 80. Both have 32 ROPs. Theoretical rates follow the hardware counts: the GTX 770 delivers 3.333 TFLOPS FP32, 138.9 GTexel/s, and 34.72 GPixel/s; the R9 370X delivers 2.637 TFLOPS, 82.40 GTexel/s, and 32.96 GPixel/s.

Power and physical specs diverge sharply. The GTX 770 has a 230 W TDP with 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin connectors and a 550 W suggested PSU, while the R9 370X has a 180 W TDP with 2x 6-pin connectors and a 450 W suggested PSU. The GTX 770 is longer at 267 mm versus 221 mm, and wider at 38 mm versus the R9 370X's unspecified width. Both are dual-slot cards with identical display outputs: 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2.

API support shows one key difference: DirectX 12 (11_1) on the R9 370X versus DirectX 12 (11_0) on the GTX 770. Both support OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan versions are nearly identical (1.2.170 versus 1.2.175). The R9 370X launched at 199 USD in August 2015, while the GTX 770 launched at 399 USD in May 2013. Both are end-of-life products with no active production.