
GRID T4-8Q
Popular choices:

Radeon R9 370
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.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.
GRID T4-8Q
2015Why buy it
- ✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌1577.9% HIGHER MSRP$2,500 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 1.9 vs 31.7 G3D/$ ($2,500 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
Radeon R9 370
2015Why buy it
- ✅Costs $2,351 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $2,500 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 1563.8% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 31.7 vs 1.9 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $2,500 MSRP).
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 2 GB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
GRID T4-8Q
2015Radeon R9 370
2015Why buy it
- ✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.
Why buy it
- ✅Costs $2,351 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $2,500 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 1563.8% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 31.7 vs 1.9 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $2,500 MSRP).
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 2 GB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌1577.9% HIGHER MSRP$2,500 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 1.9 vs 31.7 G3D/$ ($2,500 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
Quick Answers
So, is GRID T4-8Q better than Radeon R9 370?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
Is Radeon R9 370 still worth buying for gaming in 2026?
Games Benchmarks
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 9800X3D 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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | GRID T4-8Q | Radeon R9 370 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 105 FPS | 100 FPS |
| medium | 86 FPS | 85 FPS |
| high | 69 FPS | 68 FPS |
| ultra | 41 FPS | 40 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 87 FPS | 87 FPS |
| medium | 73 FPS | 75 FPS |
| high | 53 FPS | 53 FPS |
| ultra | 30 FPS | 30 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 28 FPS | 27 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 26 FPS |
| high | 18 FPS | 17 FPS |
| ultra | 15 FPS | 15 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GRID T4-8Q | Radeon R9 370 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 120 FPS | 118 FPS |
| medium | 94 FPS | 87 FPS |
| high | 77 FPS | 67 FPS |
| ultra | 58 FPS | 41 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 83 FPS | 67 FPS |
| medium | 61 FPS | 45 FPS |
| high | 50 FPS | 33 FPS |
| ultra | 37 FPS | 22 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 37 FPS | 24 FPS |
| medium | 28 FPS | 16 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 13 FPS |
| ultra | 22 FPS | 9 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GRID T4-8Q | Radeon R9 370 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 214 FPS | 212 FPS |
| medium | 171 FPS | 170 FPS |
| high | 143 FPS | 142 FPS |
| ultra | 107 FPS | 106 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 161 FPS | 159 FPS |
| medium | 129 FPS | 127 FPS |
| high | 107 FPS | 106 FPS |
| ultra | 80 FPS | 80 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 107 FPS | 106 FPS |
| medium | 86 FPS | 85 FPS |
| high | 71 FPS | 71 FPS |
| ultra | 54 FPS | 53 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GRID T4-8Q | Radeon R9 370 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 184 FPS | 136 FPS |
| medium | 149 FPS | 109 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 94 FPS |
| ultra | 103 FPS | 78 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 132 FPS | 99 FPS |
| medium | 110 FPS | 82 FPS |
| high | 98 FPS | 71 FPS |
| ultra | 76 FPS | 55 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 77 FPS | 59 FPS |
| medium | 60 FPS | 45 FPS |
| high | 49 FPS | 35 FPS |
| ultra | 36 FPS | 25 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GRID T4-8Q and Radeon R9 370

GRID T4-8Q
GRID T4-8Q
The GRID T4-8Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 30 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 722 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,762 points.

Radeon R9 370
Radeon R9 370
The Radeon R9 370 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 5 2015. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 925 MHz to 975 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 110W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,722 points.
Graphics Performance
The GRID T4-8Q scores 4,762 and the Radeon R9 370 reaches 4,722 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID T4-8Q is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Radeon R9 370 uses GCN 1.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,536 (GRID T4-8Q) vs 1,280 (Radeon R9 370). Raw compute: 2.218 TFLOPS (GRID T4-8Q) vs 2.496 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 370).
| Feature | GRID T4-8Q | Radeon R9 370 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 4,762 | 4,722 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1536+20% | 1280 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.218 TFLOPS | 2.496 TFLOPS+13% |
| ROPs | 64+100% | 32 |
| TMUs | 96+20% | 80 |
| L1 Cache | 576 KB+50% | 384 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+300% | 0.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GRID T4-8Q | Radeon R9 370 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GRID T4-8Q comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 370 has 4 GB. The Radeon R9 370 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GRID T4-8Q) vs 0.5 MB (Radeon R9 370) — the GRID T4-8Q has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GRID T4-8Q | Radeon R9 370 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 4 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 256-bit+300% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+300% | 0.5 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The GRID T4-8Q draws 100W versus the Radeon R9 370's 110W — a 9.5% difference. The GRID T4-8Q is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID T4-8Q) vs 450W (Radeon R9 370). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin.
| Feature | GRID T4-8Q | Radeon R9 370 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W-9% | 110W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-22% | 450W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 1x 6-pin |
| Length | — | 221mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | — | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 75 |
| Perf/Watt | 47.6+11% | 42.9 |
Value Analysis
The GRID T4-8Q launched at $2500 MSRP, while the Radeon R9 370 launched at $149. The Radeon R9 370 costs 94% less ($2351 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 1.9 (GRID T4-8Q) vs 31.7 (Radeon R9 370) — the Radeon R9 370 offers 1568.4% better value.
| Feature | GRID T4-8Q | Radeon R9 370 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $2500 | $149-94% |
| Performance per Dollar | 1.9 | 31.7+1568% |
| Codename | GM204 | Trinidad |
| Release | August 30 2015 | May 5 2015 |
| Ranking | #535 | #456 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












