GeForce RTX 4070 Ti vs GTS 350M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTS 350M with GeForce RTX 4070 Ti, including specs and performance data.
RTX 4070 Ti outperforms GTS 350M by a whopping 7700% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1095 | 5 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 91 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 48.97 |
| Power efficiency | 2.61 | 20.01 |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) | Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) |
| GPU code name | GT215 | AD104 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 7 January 2010 (15 years ago) | 3 January 2023 (2 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $799 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 96 | 7680 |
| Core clock speed | 500 MHz | 2310 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2610 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 727 million | 35,800 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 28 Watt | 285 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 16.00 | 626.4 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.24 TFLOPS | 40.09 TFLOPS |
| Gigaflops | 360 | no data |
| ROPs | 8 | 80 |
| TMUs | 32 | 240 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 240 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 60 |
Form factor & 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).
| Laptop size | large | no data |
| Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 | no data |
| Interface | MXM-II | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 285 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 16-pin |
| SLI options | + | - |
| MXM Type | MXM 3.0 Type-B | no data |
VRAM capacity and type
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 | GDDR6X |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 12 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 192 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | Up to 2000 MHz | 1313 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 504.2 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
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 | DisplayPortLVDSHDMIDual Link DVISingle Link DVIVGA | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |
| HDMI | + | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Power management | 8.0 | no data |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 6.7 |
| OpenGL | 2.1 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
| CUDA | + | 8.9 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. 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.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 2−3
−11450%
| 231
+11450%
|
| 1440p | 1−2
−14900%
| 150
+14900%
|
| 4K | 1−2
−9500%
| 96
+9500%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 3.46 |
| 1440p | no data | 5.33 |
| 4K | no data | 8.32 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−2643%
|
190−200
+2643%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−5800%
|
236
+5800%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 110−120 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−2643%
|
190−200
+2643%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−2625%
|
109
+2625%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
−7088%
|
575
+7088%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 6−7
−2483%
|
150−160
+2483%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 110−120 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−2643%
|
190−200
+2643%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−2225%
|
93
+2225%
|
| Dota 2 | 0−1 | 205 |
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
−1589%
|
152
+1589%
|
| Fortnite | 4−5
−7600%
|
300−350
+7600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
−5813%
|
473
+5813%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 0−1 | 178 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−1692%
|
210−220
+1692%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 6−7
−2483%
|
150−160
+2483%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−2800%
|
170−180
+2800%
|
| World of Tanks | 24−27
−1063%
|
270−280
+1063%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 110−120 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−2643%
|
190−200
+2643%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−1975%
|
83
+1975%
|
| Dota 2 | 0−1 | 243 |
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
−1644%
|
150−160
+1644%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
−5025%
|
410
+5025%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−1692%
|
210−220
+1692%
|
1440p
High Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 6−7
−2817%
|
170−180
+2817%
|
| World of Tanks | 5−6
−10220%
|
500−550
+10220%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
−284%
|
110−120
+284%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−1667%
|
53
+1667%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−3100%
|
160−170
+3100%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 170−180 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−4800%
|
190−200
+4800%
|
| Valorant | 6−7
−6700%
|
400−450
+6700%
|
4K
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−1047%
|
172
+1047%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−1047%
|
172
+1047%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−6867%
|
200−210
+6867%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 0−1 | 60−65 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−1047%
|
172
+1047%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−9000%
|
90−95
+9000%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−1100%
|
24
+1100%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−1407%
|
226
+1407%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 100−110 |
| Valorant | 1−2
−23900%
|
240−250
+23900%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Forza Horizon 5 | 220−230
+0%
|
220−230
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 173
+0%
|
173
+0%
|
| Valorant | 450−500
+0%
|
450−500
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Forza Horizon 5 | 220−230
+0%
|
220−230
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 163
+0%
|
163
+0%
|
| Valorant | 450−500
+0%
|
450−500
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Forza Horizon 5 | 220−230
+0%
|
220−230
+0%
|
| Valorant | 450−500
+0%
|
450−500
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 156
+0%
|
156
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 156
+0%
|
156
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 280
+0%
|
280
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 148
+0%
|
148
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 84
+0%
|
84
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 140
+0%
|
140
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
This is how GTS 350M and RTX 4070 Ti compete in popular games:
- RTX 4070 Ti is 11450% faster in 1080p
- RTX 4070 Ti is 14900% faster in 1440p
- RTX 4070 Ti is 9500% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX 4070 Ti is 23900% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RTX 4070 Ti is ahead in 35 tests (64%)
- there's a draw in 20 tests (36%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.06 | 82.68 |
| Recency | 7 January 2010 | 3 January 2023 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 12 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 28 Watt | 285 Watt |
GTS 350M has 917.9% lower power consumption.
RTX 4070 Ti, on the other hand, has a 7700% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 900% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 4070 Ti is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTS 350M in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GTS 350M is a notebook card while GeForce RTX 4070 Ti is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
