FirePro S9000 vs Radeon R9 M370X
In this comparison between FirePro S9000 and Radeon R9 M370X you will find out which graphics card performs better in today's games. Bear in mind that third-party versions may have more efficient cooling and higher clock speeds. This will increase cards' performance, though not by much. In addition to raw power you should also take into account the dimensions. Thicker models simply will not fit into a small mini-ITX case. The resolution of your monitor also affects the choice, since 4K gameplay requires a more powerful GPU. And don't overspend on the graphics card. Other parts of your build may also need to be upgraded, save some money for the CPU or power supply. For some people FirePro S9000 will be the best choice, for others Radeon R9 M370X will be their preference. Study the comparison tables below and make your choice.
FirePro S9000
Radeon R9 M370X is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: Radeon R9 M370X is only used in laptop graphics. It has lower GPU clock speed compared to the desktop variant, which results in lower power consumption, but also 10-30% lower gaming performance. Check available laptop models with Radeon R9 M370X here:
Main Specs
| FirePro S9000 | Radeon R9 M370X | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 8-pin | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | 2 GB |
| Display Connectors | 1x DisplayPort | |
| Check Price |
- FirePro S9000 has 4 GB more memory, than Radeon R9 M370X.
- FirePro S9000 is used in Desktops, and Radeon R9 M370X - in Laptops.
- FirePro S9000 and Radeon R9 M370X are build with GCN 1.0 architecture.
- Core clock speed of FirePro S9000 is 100 MHz higher, than Radeon R9 M370X.
- FirePro S9000 and Radeon R9 M370X are manufactured by 28 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of FirePro S9000 is 1000 MHz higher, than Radeon R9 M370X.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 35−40 | 3−4 |
| ultra / 1080p | 21−24 | 1−2 |
| QHD / 1440p | 16−18 | 0−1 |
| 4K / 2160p | 10−11 | − |
| low / 720p | 60−65 | 14−16 |
| medium / 1080p | 40−45 | 6−7 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 583% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 55−60 | 8−9 |
| ultra / 1080p | 45−50 | 6−7 |
| QHD / 1440p | 35−40 | 0−1 |
| 4K / 2160p | 18−20 | − |
| low / 720p | 100−110 | 21−24 |
| medium / 1080p | 60−65 | 9−10 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Battlefield 5 is 518% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 45−50 |
| high / 1080p | − | 40−45 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Call of Duty: Warzone is 10% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| low / 768p | 250−260 | 120−130 |
| medium / 768p | 220−230 | 100−110 |
| ultra / 1080p | 180−190 | 50−55 |
| QHD / 1440p | 110−120 | 24−27 |
| 4K / 2160p | 70−75 | − |
| high / 768p | 210−220 | 75−80 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 158% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| low / 768p | 60−65 | 70−75 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 21−24 |
| medium / 1080p | 55−60 | 40−45 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 5% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| low / 768p | 120−130 | 75−80 |
| medium / 768p | 110−120 | 55−60 |
| ultra / 1080p | 100−110 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Dota 2 is 109% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 45−50 | 4−5 |
| ultra / 1080p | 40−45 | 4−5 |
| QHD / 1440p | 27−30 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 14−16 | 1−2 |
| low / 720p | 80−85 | 14−16 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 6−7 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Far Cry 5 is 683% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 60−65 | 12−14 |
| ultra / 1080p | 45−50 | 7−8 |
| QHD / 1440p | 27−30 | 4−5 |
| 4K / 2160p | 27−30 | − |
| low / 720p | 180−190 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 110−120 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Fortnite is 314% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 60−65 | 8−9 |
| ultra / 1080p | 45−50 | 7−8 |
| QHD / 1440p | 30−35 | 0−1 |
| 4K / 2160p | 24−27 | − |
| low / 720p | 100−110 | 21−24 |
| medium / 1080p | 65−70 | 10−11 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Forza Horizon 4 is 483% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| low / 768p | 140−150 | 50−55 |
| medium / 768p | 120−130 | − |
| high / 1080p | 70−75 | 10−11 |
| ultra / 1080p | 30−35 | 4−5 |
| QHD / 1440p | 21−24 | 0−1 |
| medium / 720p | − | 40−45 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Grand Theft Auto V is 277% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 24−27 | 2−3 |
| ultra / 1080p | 20−22 | 0−1 |
| QHD / 1440p | 16−18 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 8−9 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 65−70 | 9−10 |
| medium / 1080p | 30−35 | 4−5 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Metro Exodus is 720% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| low / 768p | 130−140 | 85−90 |
| high / 1080p | − | 70−75 |
| medium / 1080p | 120−130 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Minecraft is 55% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 12−14 |
| low / 720p | 100−110 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 18−20 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 130% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 24−27 | 7−8 |
| ultra / 1080p | 16−18 | 4−5 |
| QHD / 1440p | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| 4K / 2160p | 7−8 | − |
| low / 720p | 65−70 | 8−9 |
| medium / 1080p | 35−40 | 8−9 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 414% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| low / 768p | 130−140 | 20−22 |
| medium / 768p | 85−90 | 12−14 |
| high / 1080p | 45−50 | 7−8 |
| ultra / 1080p | 24−27 | 5−6 |
| 4K / 2160p | 16−18 | 1−2 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 588% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
| low / 768p | 90−95 | 75−80 |
| medium / 768p | 60−65 | 40−45 |
| ultra / 1080p | 50−55 | 18−20 |
| high / 768p | 60−65 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in World of Tanks is 59% more, than Radeon R9 M370X. | ||
Full Specs
| FirePro S9000 | Radeon R9 M370X | |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Code name | Tahiti | Cape Verde |
| Type | Workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 24 August 2012 | 19 May 2015 |
| Pipelines | 1792 | 640 |
| Core clock speed | 900 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Transistor count | 4,313 million | 1500 Million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 100.8 | |
| Floating-point performance | 3,226 gflops | |
| Length | 267 mm | |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5500 MHz | 4500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 264 GB/s | |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | DirectX 12 (FL 11_1), Shader 5.0 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | |
| Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 92 Mh/s | 125 Mh/s |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
| Form factor | full height / full length | |
| DisplayPort count | 1 | |
| Dual-link DVI support | + | |
| Check Price |