
FireStream 9170
Popular choices:

GRID K340
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The FireStream 9170 is positioned at rank 393 and the GRID K340 is on rank 404, so the FireStream 9170 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar FireStream 9170
Performance Per Dollar GRID K340
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GRID K340 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.5% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the FireStream 9170.
| Insight | FireStream 9170 | GRID K340 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.5%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.5%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The FireStream 9170 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the FireStream 9170 holds the technical lead. Priced at $20 (vs $57), it costs 65% less, resulting in a 183.7% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | FireStream 9170 | GRID K340 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+183.7%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($20) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($57) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of FireStream 9170 and GRID K340

FireStream 9170
The FireStream 9170 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 23 2010. It features the TeraScale 2 architecture. The core clock speed is 825 MHz. It has 1600 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 647 points.

GRID K340
The GRID K340 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 23 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 950 MHz. It has 384 ×4 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 650 points. Launch price was $3,299.
Graphics Performance
The FireStream 9170 scores 647 and the GRID K340 reaches 650 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FireStream 9170 is built on TeraScale 2 while the GRID K340 uses Kepler, both on 40 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 1,600 (FireStream 9170) vs 384 (GRID K340). Raw compute: 2.64 TFLOPS (FireStream 9170) vs 0.7296 TFLOPS ×4 (GRID K340).
| Feature | FireStream 9170 | GRID K340 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 647 | 650 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 | Kepler |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1600+317% | 384 ×4 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.64 TFLOPS+262% | 0.7296 TFLOPS ×4 |
| ROPs | 32+300% | 8 ×4 |
| TMUs | 80+150% | 32 ×4 |
| L1 Cache | 160 KB+400% | 32 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+300% | 128 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FireStream 9170 | GRID K340 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (FireStream 9170) vs 128 KB (GRID K340) — the FireStream 9170 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | FireStream 9170 | GRID K340 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+300% | 128 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The FireStream 9170 draws 225W versus the GRID K340's 225W — a 0% difference. The GRID K340 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FireStream 9170) vs 350W (GRID K340). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | FireStream 9170 | GRID K340 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 225W | 225W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 241mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 2.9 | 2.9 |
Value Analysis
The FireStream 9170 launched at $1999 MSRP and currently averages $20, while the GRID K340 launched at $3299 and now averages $57. The FireStream 9170 costs 64.9% less ($37 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 32.4 (FireStream 9170) vs 11.4 (GRID K340) — the FireStream 9170 offers 184.2% better value. The GRID K340 is the newer GPU (2013 vs 2010).
| Feature | FireStream 9170 | GRID K340 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1999-39% | $3299 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $20-65% | $57 |
| Performance per Dollar | 32.4+184% | 11.4 |
| Codename | Cypress | GK107 |
| Release | June 23 2010 | July 23 2013 |
| Ranking | #631 | #817 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
















