Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge) vs GeForce GTS 350M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTS 350M and Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
R4 (Stoney Ridge) outperforms GTS 350M by a moderate 11% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1100 | 1080 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 2.58 | 5.34 |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) | GCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016) |
| GPU code name | GT215 | Stoney Ridge |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 7 January 2010 (15 years ago) | 1 June 2016 (8 years ago) |
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 | 192 |
| Core clock speed | 500 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 600 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 727 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 28 Watt | 15 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 16.00 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.24 TFLOPS | no data |
| Gigaflops | 360 | no data |
| ROPs | 8 | no data |
| TMUs | 32 | no data |
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 | no data |
| 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 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | Up to 2000 MHz | no data |
| Memory bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | no data |
| 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 | no data |
| 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 and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_1) | 12 (FL 12_0) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 2.1 | no data |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | no data |
| Vulkan | N/A | - |
| CUDA | + | - |
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 | 8−9
−12.5%
| 9
+12.5%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Atomic Heart | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Atomic Heart | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−3.1%
|
30−35
+3.1%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 24−27
−8.3%
|
24−27
+8.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−6.7%
|
16−18
+6.7%
|
| Fortnite | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−3.1%
|
30−35
+3.1%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−6.7%
|
16−18
+6.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−3.1%
|
30−35
+3.1%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 6−7
−16.7%
|
7−8
+16.7%
|
| Valorant | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
4K
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Dota 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
This is how GTS 350M and R4 (Stoney Ridge) compete in popular games:
- R4 (Stoney Ridge) is 13% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Valorant, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the R4 (Stoney Ridge) is 200% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- R4 (Stoney Ridge) is ahead in 15 tests (34%)
- there's a draw in 29 tests (66%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.03 | 1.14 |
| Recency | 7 January 2010 | 1 June 2016 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 28 Watt | 15 Watt |
R4 (Stoney Ridge) has a 10.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 86.7% lower power consumption.
The Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTS 350M in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
