Chipversus Index
Jump to Section

FireStream 9370 vs GRID K240Q

CPUCPUGPUGPU

FireStream 9370

2010Core: 825 MHz
Buy on Amazon
VS

GRID K240Q

2013Core: 745 MHz
Buy on Amazon

FireStream 9370 vs GRID K240Q Performance Spectrum

FireStream 9370
4 GB 225
2,528
0.0%
brand logoRadeon HD 4870
brand logoRadeon R7 M380
brand logoRadeon HD 5850
brand logoRadeon HD 6870
brand logoRadeon RX 470 (móvel)
brand logoRadeon RX 7400
brand logoRadeon RX 7800M
brand logoRadeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB
GRID K240Q
2 GB 225
2,541
+0.5%
brand logoGeForce MX110
brand logoGeForce GTX 480M
brand logoGeForce GTX 670MX
brand logoGeForce MX150
brand logoGeForce GTX 980M
brand logoGeForce RTX 2070 with Max-Q Design
brand logoGeForce RTX 2060 12GB
brand logoRTX 5000 Ada Generation Embedded 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.

FireStream 9370 vs GRID K240Q: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

FireStream 9370

2010

Why buy it

  • ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 2 GB).

Trade-offs

  • ❌2010 hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
  • ❌
    60% HIGHER MSRP
    $800 MSRPvs$500 MSRP
  • ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 3.2 vs 5.1 G3D/$ ($800 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
  • ❌26600% longer card at 267mm vs 1mm.

GRID K240Q

2013

Why buy it

  • ✅Costs $300 less on MSRP ($500 MSRP vs $800 MSRP).
  • ✅Delivers 60.8% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 5.1 vs 3.2 G3D/$ ($500 MSRP vs $800 MSRP).
  • ✅Measures 1mm instead of 267mm, a 266mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

  • ❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
  • ❌2013 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?
GRID K240Q is the faster gaming card right now based on the synthetic data we have. It leads by 0.5% in PassMark G3D (2,541 vs 2,528), which is the best performance signal available in this matchup.
Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?
FireStream 9370 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: 4 GB vs 2 GB of VRAM. That gives it more room for heavier textures and higher settings over time.
Which GPU is the better buy today?
GRID K240Q makes the most sense to buy today. It is $300 cheaper on MSRP at $500 vs $800, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 60.8% (5.1 vs 3.2), so the value case lines up with the gaming result. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, GRID K240Q is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, FireStream 9370 has the stronger long-term case.

FireStream 9370 vs GRID K240Q Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

AMD

FireStream 9370

The FireStream 9370 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: 2,528 points.

NVIDIA

GRID K240Q

The GRID K240Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 28 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 745 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,541 points. Launch price was $469.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The FireStream 9370 scores 2,528 and the GRID K240Q reaches 2,541 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FireStream 9370 is built on TeraScale 2 while the GRID K240Q uses Kepler, both on 40 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 1,600 (FireStream 9370) vs 1,536 (GRID K240Q). Raw compute: 2.64 TFLOPS (FireStream 9370) vs 2.289 TFLOPS (GRID K240Q).

FeatureFireStream 9370GRID K240Q
G3D Mark Score
2,528
2,541
Architecture
TeraScale 2
Kepler
Process Node
40 nm
28 nm
Shading Units
1600+4%
1536
Compute (TFLOPS)
2.64 TFLOPS+15%
2.289 TFLOPS
ROPs
32
32
TMUs
80
128+60%
L1 Cache
160 KB+25%
128 KB
L2 Cache
512 KB
512 KB
✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

FeatureFireStream 9370GRID K240Q
Upscaling Tech
Upscaling support
Upscaling support
Frame Generation
Not Supported
Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction
No
No
Low Latency
Standard
Standard
💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The FireStream 9370 has 4 GB of VRAM, while the GRID K240Q carries 2 GB. FireStream 9370 gives you 100% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 64-bit on the FireStream 9370 and 64-bit on the GRID K240Q.

FeatureFireStream 9370GRID K240Q
VRAM Capacity
4 GB+100%
2 GB
Memory Type
GDDR5
GDDR5
Bus Width
64-bit
64-bit
L2 Cache
512 KB
512 KB
🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 11.2 (FireStream 9370) vs 11_0 (GRID K240Q). OpenGL: 4.4 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 1 vs 0.

FeatureFireStream 9370GRID K240Q
DirectX
11.2+2%
11_0
OpenGL
4.4
4.6+5%
Max Displays
1
0
🎬

Media & Encoding

Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (FireStream 9370) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GRID K240Q).

FeatureFireStream 9370GRID K240Q
Encoder
None
—
Decoder
UVD 2.2
—
Codecs
H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2
H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2
🔌

Power & Dimensions

The FireStream 9370 draws 225W versus the GRID K240Q's 225W — a 0% difference. The GRID K240Q is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FireStream 9370) vs 350W (GRID K240Q). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 267mm vs 1mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 80°C.

FeatureFireStream 9370GRID K240Q
TDP
225W
225W
Recommended PSU
350W
350W
Power Connector
PCIe-powered
PCIe-powered
Length
267mm
1mm
Height
111mm
—
Slots
2
0-100%
Temp (Load)
80°C
80°C
Perf/Watt
11.2
11.3
💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the FireStream 9370 came in at $800, while the GRID K240Q launched at $500. On MSRP, GRID K240Q was 37.5% cheaper ($300 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 3.2 (FireStream 9370) vs 5.1 (GRID K240Q) — the GRID K240Q offers 59.4% better value. The newer card here is GRID K240Q (2013 vs 2010).

FeatureFireStream 9370GRID K240Q
MSRP
$800
$500-38%
Performance per Dollar
3.2
5.1+59%
Codename
Cypress
GK104
Release
June 23 2010
June 28 2013
Ranking
#631
#628
Search FireStream 9370 on AmazonSearch GRID K240Q on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.