Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
Radeon HD 6350 vs GeForce GT 220
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 1171 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | GT2xx (2009−2012) | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | GT216 | Park |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 12 October 2009 (14 years old) | 7 February 2011 (13 years old) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $79.99 | $23 |
| Current price | $121 (1.5x MSRP) | $19 (0.8x MSRP) |
Value for money
no data
Technical specs
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 48 | 80 |
| CUDA cores | 48 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 625 MHz | 650 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 486 million | 292 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 58 Watt | 19 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 9.840 | 5.200 |
| Floating-point performance | 144 gflops | 104 gflops |
Size and compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 6.6" (16.8 cm) | 168 mm |
| Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
Memory
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | GDDR3 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 790 MHz | 800 MBps |
| Memory bandwidth | 25.3 GB/s | 6.4 GB/s |
Video outputs and ports
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
| Display Connectors | VGADVIHDMI | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.3a |
| Multi monitor support | + | no data |
| HDMI | + | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| Audio input for HDMI | S/PDIF + HDA | no data |
API support
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_1) | 11.2 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | 3.1 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | + | no data |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
Benchmark coverage: 25%
GeForce GT 220 outperforms Radeon HD 6350 by 53% in Passmark.
Advantages and disadvantages
| Recency | 12 October 2009 | 7 February 2011 |
| Cost | $79.99 | $23 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 512 MB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 58 Watt | 19 Watt |
We couldn't decide between GeForce GT 220 and Radeon HD 6350. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar GPU comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
