GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA T600 and AMD Radeon R7 M370 represent two very different generations of mobile and workstation graphics, and the benchmark data reflects a significant performance gulf between them. The T600, built on the Turing architecture, is a modern entry-level workstation card, while the R7 M370 is an older GCN-based part aimed at mainstream laptops. The data available shows the T600 dominating in every measurable compute and graphics workload, with an average benchmark score of 7035 compared to the R7 M370’s 6764. This places both cards in the bottom half of all GPUs, with the T600 at the 39th percentile and the R7 M370 at the 38th percentile, but the gap between them is anything but small in raw performance.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA T600 than the AMD Radeon R7 M370 in OpenCL performance?

A: The T600 scores 27875 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the R7 M370 scores 7063. This represents a delta of 294.7%, meaning the T600 is nearly four times faster in this compute workload.

Q: Which card has a higher memory bandwidth, and what is the difference?

A: The NVIDIA T600 offers 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth with its GDDR6 memory, while the AMD Radeon R7 M370 provides 57.60 GB/s with GDDR5. The T600’s bandwidth is over 2.7 times higher, which directly benefits memory-intensive tasks like texture streaming and compute workloads.

Q: Are these cards comparable in terms of their overall benchmark percentile ranking?

A: Yes, they are close in percentile ranking. The T600 sits at the 39th percentile of all GPUs, while the R7 M370 is at the 38th percentile. Despite this near-identical percentile, the T600’s average benchmark score of 7035 is higher than the R7 M370’s 6764.

Q: What is the difference in shading units and texture mapping units between the two?

A: The NVIDIA T600 has 640 shading units and 40 TMUs, while the AMD Radeon R7 M370 has 384 shading units and 24 TMUs. This gives the T600 a 66.7% advantage in shading units and a 66.7% advantage in TMUs, which translates to higher fill rates.

Q: Do both cards support DirectX 12?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12, but at different feature levels. The T600 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the R7 M370 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), meaning the T600 offers a more complete set of DirectX 12 features.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The NVIDIA T600 has a pixel rate of 42.72 GPixel/s, compared to the AMD Radeon R7 M370’s 7.680 GPixel/s. The T600 is over 5.5 times faster in pixel throughput, which is critical for higher resolutions and anti-aliasing workloads.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA T600 is built on the Turing architecture using the TU117 chip, manufactured on a 12 nm process at TSMC. This chip contains 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 23.5 million per mm². In contrast, the AMD Radeon R7 M370 uses the older GCN 1.0 architecture with the Litho chip, produced on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC. The R7 M370’s chip has just 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, with a density of 12.3 million per mm². This generational leap in process node and transistor budget gives the T600 a substantial raw compute advantage before clock speeds are even considered.

The T600’s base clock is 735 MHz with a boost clock of 1335 MHz, while the R7 M370 runs at a higher base clock of 875 MHz but only boosts to 960 MHz. Despite the R7 M370’s higher base frequency, the T600’s higher boost clock and far greater shader count result in significantly higher throughput. The T600 has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, whereas the R7 M370 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and only 8 ROPs. The ROP count difference is particularly stark, explaining why the T600’s pixel rate is 42.72 GPixel/s versus the R7 M370’s 7.680 GPixel/s.

Memory architecture also differs sharply. The T600 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, achieving 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The R7 M370 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on the same 128-bit bus, but only achieves 57.60 GB/s due to a much lower memory clock of 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective) versus the T600’s 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective). Both cards lack ray tracing and tensor cores, but the T600 supports a newer Vulkan version (1.4) compared to the R7 M370’s Vulkan 1.2.170. Additionally, the T600 uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the R7 M370 is limited to PCIe 3.0 x8, halving available bus bandwidth for data transfers.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA T600 is the superior GPU in every benchmark category where both cards have results. In the two head-to-head tests available, the T600 wins both, with deltas of 294.7% and 295.7% in Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan, respectively. The R7 M370 does not win a single comparison. The T600’s average benchmark score of 7035 also exceeds the R7 M370’s 6764, and it holds a higher percentile ranking at 39 versus 38. For users seeking compute performance, the T600 offers roughly four times the OpenCL and Vulkan throughput, making it the clear choice for any GPU-accelerated workload.

However, the R7 M370 is not without context. Its nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro M5100, which scores 6830 and is 1% faster, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M at 6946, which is 2.6% faster. The T600’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 at 7157, which is 1.7% faster, and the GeForce GTX 680M at 7023, which is 0.2% slower. This shows that while the T600 is far ahead of the R7 M370, it still sits in a competitive range where other older high-end parts can match it. The R7 M370, by contrast, is closer to entry-level parts like the GeForce GT 1010, which scores 6698 and is 1% slower.

For a user choosing between these two specific cards, the T600 is the only rational pick based on performance. It offers more memory, higher bandwidth, greater shader throughput, and newer API support. The R7 M370’s only potential advantage is its higher base clock, but that does not translate into any benchmark victory. The T600 is end-of-life, as is the R7 M370, but the T600’s Turing architecture and 12 nm node make it a far more capable modern part.

Specification Differences

The NVIDIA T600 and AMD Radeon R7 M370 differ across nearly every specification field. The T600 uses a 12 nm process node, while the R7 M370 uses 28 nm. The T600’s die size is 200 mm² with 4,700 million transistors, versus the R7 M370’s 77 mm² die with 950 million transistors. Clock speeds differ: the T600 has a base of 735 MHz and a boost of 1335 MHz, while the R7 M370 has a base of 875 MHz and a boost of 960 MHz. Memory is another major division, with the T600 offering 4 GB of GDDR6 at 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective) and the R7 M370 offering 2 GB of GDDR5 at 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective). Bandwidth is 160.0 GB/s versus 57.60 GB/s.

Compute resources differ significantly: the T600 has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, while the R7 M370 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The T600 achieves a pixel rate of 42.72 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 53.40 GTexel/s, while the R7 M370 achieves 7.680 GPixel/s and 23.04 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 1.709 TFLOPS for the T600 and 737.3 GFLOPS for the R7 M370. The T600 also supports FP16 at 3.418 TFLOPS, a feature the R7 M370 lacks entirely. Power consumption is listed at 40 W for the T600, while the R7 M370 has no TDP listed. The T600 is a single-slot card with no power connectors, while the R7 M370 has no slot width or connector information. The T600 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the R7 M370 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. Display outputs differ as well: the T600 provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a, while the R7 M370 has no listed display outputs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only two head-to-head benchmarks available are Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, and the NVIDIA T600 wins both by a massive margin. In Geekbench OpenCL, the T600 scores 27875 against the R7 M370’s 7063, a delta of 294.7%. This means the T600 delivers nearly four times the compute throughput in this workload, which is consistent with its far higher shader count, memory bandwidth, and FP32 performance. In Geekbench Vulkan, the T600 scores 25580 versus 6465, a delta of 295.7%. This near-identical percentage suggests that the performance gap is consistent across different compute APIs, reinforcing that the T600’s hardware advantages translate broadly.

The average benchmark score for the T600 is 7035, which is higher than the R7 M370’s 6764. However, the T600’s individual benchmark scores vary widely: it scores 6479 in Passmark G3D, 2402 in Passmark GPU Compute, and 756 in Passmark G2D. It also scores low in legacy DirectX tests, such as 32 in Passmark DirectX 10, 49 in DirectX 11, 25 in DirectX 12, and 114 in DirectX 9. These low DirectX scores are notable, indicating that the T600’s strength is in modern compute and Vulkan workloads rather than legacy rasterization tests. The R7 M370 lacks these additional benchmark results, so no direct comparison is possible for those tests.

In terms of nearest rivals, the T600’s average score is only 0.2% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M (7023) and 1.3% higher than the GeForce GTX 675M (6946), but it is 1.7% lower than the GeForce GTX 970 (7157). The R7 M370’s nearest rival, the AMD FirePro M5100, is 1% faster with a score of 6830, while the GeForce GT 1010 is 1% slower at 6698. This places the R7 M370 in a lower performance tier than the T600, whose closest competitors are older high-end gaming GPUs.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA T600 wins decisively in every workload measured. Its 294.7% lead in OpenCL and 295.7% lead in Vulkan make it the clear choice for compute-heavy applications such as rendering, machine learning inference, or any GPU-accelerated task that leverages these APIs. The T600’s higher memory bandwidth (160.0 GB/s versus 57.60 GB/s) and larger memory pool (4 GB versus 2 GB) also make it better suited for larger datasets and higher-resolution textures. Its superior pixel rate of 42.72 GPixel/s versus 7.680 GPixel/s means it can handle higher display resolutions and more demanding anti-aliasing without dropping frames.

The AMD Radeon R7 M370 does not win in any benchmark category with available data. Its higher base clock of 875 MHz versus the T600’s 735 MHz is its only nominal advantage, but this does not translate into any performance lead, as the T600’s boost clock of 1335 MHz and superior architecture overcome the frequency deficit. The R7 M370’s lower power consumption is not listed, so no comparison can be made there, but its older 28 nm process and GCN 1.0 architecture limit its efficiency and feature set. For users with legacy DirectX 9 or DirectX 11 workloads, the R7 M370 might be expected to perform better, but no direct benchmark data exists to confirm this, and the T600’s newer architecture generally handles those APIs competently. The R7 M370’s only potential niche is in very low-power, older laptop systems where its 2 GB memory and lower bandwidth are sufficient for basic tasks, but for any serious workload, the T600 is the definitive winner.