Radeon R7 350 vs GeForce GTX 480
Aggregated performance score
GeForce GTX 480 outperforms Radeon R7 350 by an impressive 90% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 397 | 568 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.27 | 0.95 |
| Architecture | Fermi (2010−2014) | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) |
| GPU code name | GF100 | Cape Verde |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 7 December 2010 (13 years ago) | 6 July 2016 (7 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $499 | no data |
| Current price | $15.99 (0x MSRP) | $142 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
GTX 480 has 34% better value for money than R7 350.
Detailed specifications
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 | 480 | 512 |
| CUDA cores | 480 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 700 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,100 million | 1,500 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 295 Watt | 55 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 42 billion/sec | 25.60 |
| Floating-point performance | 1,345.0 gflops | 819.2 gflops |
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).
| Bus support | 16x PCI-E 2.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm) | 168 mm |
| Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 6-pin & 8-pin | None |
| SLI options | + | 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 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1536 MB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1848 MHz (3696 data rate) | 4500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 177.4 GB/s | 72 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | no data |
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 | Two Dual Link DVI, Mini HDMI | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| Multi monitor support | + | no data |
| HDMI | + | + |
| HDCP | + | no data |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | no data |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (11_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.2 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | + | no data |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+100%
|
8−9
−100%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 21−24
+120%
|
10−11
−120%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 16−18
+100%
|
8−9
−100%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
+100%
|
18−20
−100%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 27−30
+100%
|
14−16
−100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+100%
|
8−9
−100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 27−30
+92.9%
|
14−16
−92.9%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 27−30
+100%
|
14−16
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+106%
|
18−20
−106%
|
| Hitman 3 | 27−30
+92.9%
|
14−16
−92.9%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 21−24
+120%
|
10−11
−120%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 18−20
+100%
|
9−10
−100%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 21−24
+120%
|
10−11
−120%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 18−20
+111%
|
9−10
−111%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 21−24
+120%
|
10−11
−120%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 16−18
+100%
|
8−9
−100%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
+100%
|
18−20
−100%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 27−30
+100%
|
14−16
−100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+100%
|
8−9
−100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 27−30
+92.9%
|
14−16
−92.9%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 27−30
+100%
|
14−16
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+106%
|
18−20
−106%
|
| Hitman 3 | 27−30
+92.9%
|
14−16
−92.9%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 21−24
+120%
|
10−11
−120%
|
| Metro Exodus | 16−18
+100%
|
8−9
−100%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 18−20
+100%
|
9−10
−100%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 21−24
+120%
|
10−11
−120%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 21−24
+120%
|
10−11
−120%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 18−20
+111%
|
9−10
−111%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 21−24
+120%
|
10−11
−120%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 16−18
+100%
|
8−9
−100%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
+100%
|
18−20
−100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+100%
|
8−9
−100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 27−30
+92.9%
|
14−16
−92.9%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 27−30
+100%
|
14−16
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+106%
|
18−20
−106%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 21−24
+120%
|
10−11
−120%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 18−20
+111%
|
9−10
−111%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 14−16
+114%
|
7−8
−114%
|
| Hitman 3 | 16−18
+100%
|
8−9
−100%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 16−18
+100%
|
8−9
−100%
|
| Metro Exodus | 9−10
+125%
|
4−5
−125%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 14−16
+100%
|
7−8
−100%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 6−7
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 18−20
+111%
|
9−10
−111%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 16−18
+113%
|
8−9
−113%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 18−20
+100%
|
9−10
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
+111%
|
9−10
−111%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
4K
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
| Hitman 3 | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 9−10
+125%
|
4−5
−125%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 6−7
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 6−7
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
+100%
|
4−5
−100%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 6−7
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 9−10
+125%
|
4−5
−125%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9
+100%
|
4−5
−100%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 10−12
+120%
|
5−6
−120%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
+117%
|
6−7
−117%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 10.60 | 5.57 |
| Recency | 7 December 2010 | 6 July 2016 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1536 MB | 2 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 295 Watt | 55 Watt |
The GeForce GTX 480 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 350 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
