GeForce GT 230 vs RADEON HD6370D

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.

GeForce GT 230 vs RADEON HD6370D FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

GeForce GT 230 vs RADEON HD6370D: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

GeForce GT 230

2017

Why buy it

✅Costs $6 less on MSRP ($44 MSRP vs $50 MSRP).
✅Delivers 14.7% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 7.3 vs 6.4 G3D/$ ($44 MSRP vs $50 MSRP).
✅Draws 30W instead of 250W, a 220W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than RADEON HD6370D across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌2017 hardware with 512 MB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.

RADEON HD6370D

2010

Why buy it

✅14.0% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.

Trade-offs

❌2010 hardware with 512 MB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌
13.6% HIGHER MSRP
$50 MSRPvs$44 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 6.4 vs 7.3 G3D/$ ($50 MSRP vs $44 MSRP).
❌733.3% higher power demand at 250W vs 30W.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

RADEON HD6370D is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 14.0% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data. PassMark G3D leans toward GeForce GT 230 instead at 323 vs 320, so for this question the real-game FPS result matters more than the synthetic split.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

GeForce GT 230 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: a 14nm process instead of 40nm and a newer 2017 generation instead of 2010. That makes it the less risky pick as game demands keep moving.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

GeForce GT 230 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $6 cheaper on MSRP at $44 vs $50, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 14.7% (7.3 vs 6.4), which is enough to swing the recommendation its way. RADEON HD6370D still makes more sense if max raw gaming performance matters more than value.

GeForce GT 230 vs RADEON HD6370D Technical Specifications

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

GeForce GT 230

The GeForce GT 230 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 17 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1228 MHz to 1468 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 323 points. Launch price was $79.

RADEON HD6370D

The RADEON HD6370D is manufactured by AMD. It was released in December 14 2010. It features the TeraScale 3 architecture. The boost clock speed is 880 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 320 points. Launch price was $369.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GT 230 scores 323 and the RADEON HD6370D reaches 320 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GT 230 is built on Pascal while the RADEON HD6370D uses TeraScale 3, both on 14 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce GT 230) vs 1,536 (RADEON HD6370D). Raw compute: 1.127 TFLOPS (GeForce GT 230) vs 2.703 TFLOPS (RADEON HD6370D). Boost clocks: 1468 MHz vs 880 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GT 230	RADEON HD6370D
G3D Mark Score	323	320
Architecture	Pascal	TeraScale 3
Process Node	14 nm	40 nm
Shading Units	384	1536+300%
Compute (TFLOPS)	1.127 TFLOPS	2.703 TFLOPS+140%
Boost Clock	1468 MHz+67%	880 MHz
ROPs	16	32+100%
TMUs	24	96+300%
L1 Cache	144 KB	192 KB+33%
L2 Cache	512 KB	512 KB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GT 230 gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The RADEON HD6370D leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.

Feature	GeForce GT 230	RADEON HD6370D
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards ship with 512 MB of GDDR5. Memory bus width is 64-bit on the GeForce GT 230 and 128-bit on the RADEON HD6370D.

Feature	GeForce GT 230	RADEON HD6370D
VRAM Capacity	0.5 GB	0.5 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	Unknown	Unknown
Bus Width	64-bit	128-bit+100%
L2 Cache	512 KB	512 KB

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GT 230 draws 30W versus the RADEON HD6370D's 250W — a 157.1% difference. The GeForce GT 230 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GT 230) vs 350W (RADEON HD6370D). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy.

Feature	GeForce GT 230	RADEON HD6370D
TDP	30W-88%	250W
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	Legacy
Length	168mm	—
Height	111mm	—
Slots	1	—
Temp (Load)	75°C	—
Perf/Watt	10.8+731%	1.3

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the GeForce GT 230 came in at $44, while the RADEON HD6370D launched at $50. On MSRP, GeForce GT 230 was 12% cheaper ($6 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 7.3 (GeForce GT 230) vs 6.4 (RADEON HD6370D) — the GeForce GT 230 offers 14.1% better value. The newer card here is GeForce GT 230 (2017 vs 2010).

Feature	GeForce GT 230	RADEON HD6370D
MSRP	$44-12%	$50
Performance per Dollar	7.3+14%	6.4
Codename	GP108	Cayman
Release	May 17 2017	December 14 2010
Ranking	#641	#596

Search GeForce GT 230 on Amazon

Search RADEON HD6370D 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.