GeForce GTS 160M vs Radeon R9 370
When comparing GeForce GTS 160M and Radeon R9 370, we look primarily at benchmarks and game tests. But it is not only about the numbers. Often you can find third-party models with higher clock speeds, better cooling, or a customizable RGB lighting. Not all of them will have all the features you need. Another thing to consider is the port selection. Most graphics cards have at least one DisplayPort and HDMI interface, but some monitors require DVI. Before you buy, check the TDP of the graphics card - this characteristic will help you estimate the consumption of the graphics card. You may even have to upgrade your PSU to meet its requirements. An important factor when choosing between GeForce GTS 160M and Radeon R9 370 is the price. Does the additional cost justify the performance hit? Our comparison should help you make the right decision.
Radeon R9 370
GeForce GTS 160M is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: GeForce GTS 160M 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 GeForce GTS 160M here:
Main Specs
| GeForce GTS 160M | Radeon R9 370 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 60 Watt | 110 Watt |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | |
| Memory type | GDDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| Check Price |
- Radeon R9 370 has 83% more power consumption, than GeForce GTS 160M.
- GeForce GTS 160M is connected by PCIe 2.0 x16, and Radeon R9 370 uses PCIe 3.0 x16 interface.
- Radeon R9 370 has 1 GB more memory, than GeForce GTS 160M.
- GeForce GTS 160M is used in Laptops, and Radeon R9 370 - in Desktops.
- GeForce GTS 160M is build with G9x architecture, and Radeon R9 370 - with GCN 1.0.
- Core clock speed of GeForce GTS 160M is 575 MHz higher, than Radeon R9 370.
- GeForce GTS 160M is manufactured by 55 nm process technology, and Radeon R9 370 - by 28 nm process technology.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 0−1 | 35−40 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 16−18 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 10−11 |
| low / 720p | 1−2 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 0−1 | 40−45 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 6100% more, than GeForce GTS 160M. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 55−60 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 45−50 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 35−40 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 18−20 |
| low / 720p | 0−1 | 100−110 |
| medium / 1080p | − | 60−65 |
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | 45−50 | − |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| GeForce GTS 160M and Radeon R9 370 have the same average FPS in Call of Duty: Warzone. | ||
| low / 768p | 60−65 | 250−260 |
| medium / 768p | 27−30 | 220−230 |
| ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 180−190 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 110−120 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 70−75 |
| high / 768p | 16−18 | 210−220 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 685% more, than GeForce GTS 160M. | ||
| low / 768p | 70−75 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | − |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 55−60 |
| GeForce GTS 160M and Radeon R9 370 have the same average FPS in Cyberpunk 2077. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 120−130 |
| medium / 768p | 10−11 | 110−120 |
| ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | 100−110 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in Dota 2 is 313% more, than GeForce GTS 160M. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 45−50 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 40−45 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 27−30 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 0−1 | 80−85 |
| medium / 1080p | − | 45−50 |
| high / 1080p | − | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 45−50 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 27−30 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 27−30 |
| low / 720p | 21−24 | 180−190 |
| medium / 1080p | 0−1 | 110−120 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in Fortnite is 740% more, than GeForce GTS 160M. | ||
| high / 1080p | 0−1 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 45−50 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 30−35 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 24−27 |
| low / 720p | 0−1 | 100−110 |
| medium / 1080p | 0−1 | 65−70 |
| low / 768p | 18−20 | 140−150 |
| medium / 768p | − | 120−130 |
| high / 1080p | 0−1 | 70−75 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 30−35 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 21−24 |
| medium / 720p | 12−14 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in Grand Theft Auto V is 663% more, than GeForce GTS 160M. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 24−27 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 20−22 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 16−18 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 8−9 |
| low / 720p | 0−1 | 65−70 |
| medium / 1080p | − | 30−35 |
| low / 768p | 75−80 | 130−140 |
| high / 1080p | 27−30 | − |
| medium / 1080p | − | 120−130 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in Minecraft is 75% more, than GeForce GTS 160M. | ||
| ultra / 1080p | − | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 8−9 | 100−110 |
| medium / 1080p | − | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 1212% more, than GeForce GTS 160M. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 24−27 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 16−18 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 10−11 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 7−8 |
| low / 720p | 0−1 | 65−70 |
| medium / 1080p | − | 35−40 |
| low / 768p | 0−1 | 130−140 |
| medium / 768p | − | 85−90 |
| high / 1080p | − | 45−50 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 24−27 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 16−18 |
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 90−95 |
| medium / 768p | 14−16 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | 50−55 |
| high / 768p | 12−14 | 60−65 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 370 in World of Tanks is 188% more, than GeForce GTS 160M. | ||
Full Specs
| GeForce GTS 160M | Radeon R9 370 | |
| Architecture | G9x | GCN 1.0 |
| Code name | N10E-GS1 | Trinidad |
| Type | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 2 March 2009 | 5 May 2015 |
| Pipelines | 64 | 1280 |
| Core clock speed | 1500 MHz | 925 MHz |
| Boost Clock | 975 MHz | |
| Transistor count | 505 million | 2,800 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 28 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 19 billion/sec | 78.00 |
| Floating-point performance | 192 gflops | 2,496 gflops |
| Length | 221 mm | |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5600 MHz | |
| Memory bandwidth | 51 GB/s | 179.2 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12 (11_1) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 2.1 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | + | |
| CUDA cores | 64 | |
| Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 | |
| SLI options | 2-way | |
| HDMI | + | |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
| Audio input for HDMI | S/PDIF | |
| Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 336 Mh/s | |
| Laptop size | large | |
| Gigaflops | 288 | |
| MXM Type | MXM 3.0 Type-B | |
| Power management | 8.0 | |
| Check Price |