GeForce MX350 vs GTX 880M SLI

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 880M SLI and GeForce MX350, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 880M SLI
2014
2x 8 GB GDDR5, 206 Watt
21.65
+198%

GTX 880M SLI outperforms MX350 by a whopping 198% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking249532
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency7.3125.28
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameN15E-GX-A2GP107
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date12 March 2014 (10 years ago)10 February 2020 (4 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 cores3072640
Core clock speed954 MHz747 MHz
Boost clock speedno data937 MHz
Number of transistors2x 3540 Million3,300 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)206 Watt20 Watt
Texture fill rateno data29.98
Floating-point processing powerno data1.199 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data32

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 sizelargeno data
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2x 8 GB2 GB
Memory bus width2x 256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed5000 MHz1752 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data56.06 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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus++

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (FL 11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.2.131
CUDA+6.1

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.

GTX 880M SLI 21.65
+198%
GeForce MX350 7.27

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTX 880M SLI 15823
+157%
GeForce MX350 6166

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GTX 880M SLI 11817
+170%
GeForce MX350 4371

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 880M SLI 77057
+211%
GeForce MX350 24744

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 HD74
+174%
27
−174%
1440p80−85
+196%
27
−196%
4K75−80
+188%
26
−188%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+192%
12−14
−192%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50
+118%
22
−118%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+185%
13
−185%
Battlefield 5 70−75
+243%
21−24
−243%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+137%
19
−137%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+192%
12−14
−192%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+96.2%
26
−96.2%
Far Cry New Dawn 55−60
+65.7%
35
−65.7%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+177%
45−50
−177%
Hitman 3 40−45
+115%
20
−115%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
−24%
129
+24%
Metro Exodus 75−80
+105%
37
−105%
Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+81.3%
32
−81.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 70−75
+204%
24−27
−204%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
+1.1%
95
−1.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50
+84.6%
26
−84.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+517%
6
−517%
Battlefield 5 70−75
+243%
21−24
−243%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+165%
17
−165%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+192%
12−14
−192%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+122%
23
−122%
Far Cry New Dawn 55−60
+132%
25
−132%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+177%
45−50
−177%
Hitman 3 40−45
+115%
20
−115%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
−11.5%
116
+11.5%
Metro Exodus 75−80
+171%
28
−171%
Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+142%
24
−142%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 70−75
+192%
25
−192%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+118%
21−24
−118%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
+9.1%
88
−9.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50
+500%
8
−500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+270%
10−11
−270%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+650%
6
−650%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+192%
12−14
−192%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+240%
15
−240%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+600%
19
−600%
Hitman 3 40−45
+153%
17
−153%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
+420%
20
−420%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 70−75
+284%
19
−284%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+200%
16
−200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
+1500%
6
−1500%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+190%
20
−190%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+200%
14−16
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+200%
10−12
−200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+229%
7−8
−229%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+600%
3−4
−600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+257%
7−8
−257%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+213%
8−9
−213%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+377%
24−27
−377%
Hitman 3 24−27
+136%
10−12
−136%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+200%
14−16
−200%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+413%
8−9
−413%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+820%
5−6
−820%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+333%
6−7
−333%
Watch Dogs: Legion 120−130
+176%
45−50
−176%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+200%
12−14
−200%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+267%
6−7
−267%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+240%
5−6
−240%
Hitman 3 16−18
+467%
3−4
−467%
Horizon Zero Dawn 110−120
+371%
24−27
−371%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+380%
5−6
−380%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+475%
4−5
−475%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+275%
8−9
−275%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+1200%
2−3
−1200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+171%
7−8
−171%

This is how GTX 880M SLI and GeForce MX350 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 880M SLI is 174% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 880M SLI is 196% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 880M SLI is 188% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 880M SLI is 1500% faster.
  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GeForce MX350 is 24% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 880M SLI is ahead in 70 tests (97%)
  • GeForce MX350 is ahead in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 21.65 7.27
Recency 12 March 2014 10 February 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 206 Watt 20 Watt

GTX 880M SLI has a 197.8% higher aggregate performance score.

GeForce MX350, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 930% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 880M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce MX350 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M SLI
GeForce GTX 880M SLI
NVIDIA GeForce MX350
GeForce MX350

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.5 12 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 880M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 1609 votes

Rate GeForce MX350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.