Radeon R7 350 vs GeForce GTX 560 SE
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 560 SE and Radeon R7 350, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
R7 350 outperforms 560 SE by a moderate 16% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 704 | 665 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.13 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 2.25 | 7.13 |
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) |
| GPU code name | GF114 | Cape Verde |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 20 February 2012 (13 years ago) | 6 July 2016 (9 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $89.99 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 288 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 736 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,950 million | 1,500 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 55 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 35.33 | 25.60 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.8479 TFLOPS | 0.8192 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 24 | 16 |
| TMUs | 48 | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 384 KB | 128 KB |
| L2 Cache | 384 KB | 256 KB |
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).
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 210 mm | 168 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 6-pin | None |
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 | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 192 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 957 MHz | 1125 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 91.87 GB/s | 72 GB/s |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| HDMI | + | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (11_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | 2.1 | - |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.36 | 5.06 |
| Recency | 20 February 2012 | 6 July 2016 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 55 Watt |
R7 350 has a 16.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 172.7% lower power consumption.
The Radeon R7 350 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 560 SE 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.
