
GRID P40-4Q vs Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire

GRID P40-4Q
Popular choices:

Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire
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 GRID P40-4Q is positioned at rank 294 and the Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire is on rank 123, so the Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GRID P40-4Q
Performance Per Dollar Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GRID P40-4Q is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 5.1% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire.
| Insight | GRID P40-4Q | Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+5.1%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-5.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / Terascale 2 (2009−2015)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GRID P40-4Q offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GRID P40-4Q holds the technical lead. Priced at $150 (vs $150), it costs 0% less, resulting in a 5.1% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GRID P40-4Q | Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+5.1%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
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 GRID P40-4Q and Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire

GRID P40-4Q
The GRID P40-4Q 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: 5,926 points. Launch price was $469.

Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire
The Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 6 2011. It features the Terascale 2 architecture. The core clock speed is 680 MHz. It has 1920 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,637 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GRID P40-4Q scores 5,926 versus the Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire's 5,637 — the GRID P40-4Q leads by 5.1%. The GRID P40-4Q is built on Kepler while the Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire uses Terascale 2, both on 28 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 1,536 (GRID P40-4Q) vs 1,920 (Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire).
| Feature | GRID P40-4Q | Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 5,926+5% | 5,637 |
| Architecture | Kepler | Terascale 2 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 1536 | 1920+25% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GRID P40-4Q | Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of video memory. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit x2.
| Feature | GRID P40-4Q | Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 256-bit x2+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12_1 (GRID P40-4Q) vs 11_0 (Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire). Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 0.
| Feature | GRID P40-4Q | Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12_1+9% | 11_0 |
| Max Displays | 0 | 0 |
Power & Dimensions
The GRID P40-4Q draws 225W versus the Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire's 50W — a 127.3% difference. The Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID P40-4Q) vs 350W (Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin. Card length: 1mm vs 1mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | GRID P40-4Q | Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 225W | 50W-78% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 1x 6-pin |
| Length | 1mm | 1mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Perf/Watt | 26.3 | 112.7+329% |
Value Analysis
The GRID P40-4Q launched at $3000 MSRP and currently averages $150, while the Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire launched at $150 and now averages $150. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 39.5 (GRID P40-4Q) vs 37.6 (Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire) — the GRID P40-4Q offers 5.1% better value. The GRID P40-4Q is the newer GPU (2013 vs 2011).
| Feature | GRID P40-4Q | Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $3000 | $150-95% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $150 | $150 |
| Performance per Dollar | 39.5+5% | 37.6 |
| Codename | GK104 | Blackcomb XT |
| Release | June 28 2013 | January 6 2011 |
| Ranking | #628 | #537 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
















