Radeon R7 265 vs GeForce MX350

Place in performance ranking	509	404
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	1.70
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code name	N17S-G5 / GP107-670-A1	Pitcairn
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Design	no data	reference
Release date	20 February 2020 (4 years ago)	13 February 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$149
Current price	no data	$242 (1.6x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	640	1024
Core clock speed	1354 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1468 MHz	925 MHz
Number of transistors	3,300 million	2,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	25 Watt	150 Watt
Texture fill rate	29.98	59.20
Floating-point performance	no data	1,894 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce MX350 and Radeon R7 265 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Bus support	no data	PCIe 3.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	210 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1 x 6-pin

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	2 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	7000 MHz	1400 MHz
Memory bandwidth	56.06 GB/s	179.2 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	No outputs	2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Eyefinity	no data	1
HDMI	no data	+
DisplayPort support	no data	-

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration	no data	-
CrossFire	no data	1
Enduro	no data	-
FreeSync	no data	1
HD3D	no data	-
PowerTune	no data	-
TrueAudio	no data	-
ZeroCore	no data	-
DDMA audio	no data	+
Optimus	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	DirectX® 12
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	no data
Mantle	no data	-
CUDA	6.1	no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

GeForce MX350 7.25

R7 265 10.35
+42.8%

Radeon R7 265 outperforms GeForce MX350 by 43% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GeForce MX350 4371

R7 265 5220
+19.4%

Radeon R7 265 outperforms GeForce MX350 by 19% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

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	25 −40%	35−40 +40%
1440p	22 −36.4%	30−35 +36.4%
4K	27 −29.6%	35−40 +29.6%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

12−14

−33.3%

16−18
+33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	22 −36.4%	30−33 +36.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	13 −38.5%	18−20 +38.5%
Battlefield 5	37 −35.1%	50−55 +35.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	32 −40.6%	45−50 +40.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −33.3%	16−18 +33.3%
Far Cry 5	27 −29.6%	35−40 +29.6%
Far Cry New Dawn	28 −25%	35−40 +25%
Forza Horizon 4	37 −35.1%	50−55 +35.1%
Hitman 3	22 −36.4%	30−33 +36.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16 −31.3%	21−24 +31.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18 −33.3%	24−27 +33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	23 −30.4%	30−33 +30.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion	18 −33.3%	24−27 +33.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14 −28.6%	18−20 +28.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6 −33.3%	8−9 +33.3%
Battlefield 5	30 −33.3%	40−45 +33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20 −35%	27−30 +35%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −33.3%	16−18 +33.3%
Far Cry 5	23 −30.4%	30−33 +30.4%
Far Cry New Dawn	26 −34.6%	35−40 +34.6%
Forza Horizon 4	26 −34.6%	35−40 +34.6%
Hitman 3	18 −33.3%	24−27 +33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12 −33.3%	16−18 +33.3%
Metro Exodus	12 −33.3%	16−18 +33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −38.5%	18−20 +38.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	15 −40%	21−24 +40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27 −29.6%	35−40 +29.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14 −28.6%	18−20 +28.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8 −25%	10−11 +25%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10 −33.3%	12−14 +33.3%
Battlefield 5	24 −25%	30−33 +25%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −33.3%	16−18 +33.3%
Far Cry 5	21 −28.6%	27−30 +28.6%
Far Cry New Dawn	23 −30.4%	30−33 +30.4%
Forza Horizon 4	19 −42.1%	27−30 +42.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16 −31.3%	21−24 +31.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	6 −33.3%	8−9 +33.3%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12 −27.3%	14−16 +27.3%
Hitman 3	10−12 −27.3%	14−16 +27.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 −38.5%	18−20 +38.5%
Metro Exodus	5−6 −40%	7−8 +40%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 −40%	7−8 +40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−11 −40%	14−16 +40%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 −33.3%	8−9 +33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Battlefield 5	8−9 −25%	10−11 +25%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Far Cry 5	10−12 −27.3%	14−16 +27.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−11 −40%	14−16 +40%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 −27.3%	14−16 +27.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 −28.6%	9−10 +28.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 −40%	7−8 +40%
Hitman 3	7−8 −28.6%	9−10 +28.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −25%	10−11 +25%
Metro Exodus	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Battlefield 5	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −33.3%	8−9 +33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 −25%	10−11 +25%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 −28.6%	9−10 +28.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

This is how GeForce MX350 and R7 265 compete in popular games:

R7 265 is 40% faster in 1080p
R7 265 is 36% faster in 1440p
R7 265 is 30% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	7.25	10.35
Recency	20 February 2020	13 February 2014
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	25 Watt	150 Watt