Radeon R9 285 vs GeForce MX350

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce MX350 with Radeon R9 285, including specs and performance data.

GeForce MX350
2020
2 GB GDDR5, 20 Watt
7.31

R9 285 outperforms MX350 by a whopping 138% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking538316
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data8.79
Power efficiency25.226.31
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameGP107Tonga
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date10 February 2020 (4 years ago)2 September 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$249

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores6401792
Core clock speed747 MHz918 MHz
Boost clock speed937 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,300 million5,000 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)20 Watt190 Watt
Texture fill rate29.98102.8
Floating-point processing power1.199 TFLOPS3.29 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs32112

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data221 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone2x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1752 MHz1375 MHz
Memory bandwidth56.06 GB/s176.0 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 outputs2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2
HDMI-+

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 (12_1)12 (12_0)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.170
CUDA6.1-

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.

GeForce MX350 7.31
R9 285 17.37
+138%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GeForce MX350 2812
R9 285 6680
+138%

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.

GeForce MX350 4371
R9 285 8570
+96.1%

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 HD27
−122%
60−65
+122%
1440p31
−126%
70−75
+126%
4K26
−131%
60−65
+131%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data4.15
1440pno data3.56
4Kno data4.15

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14
−114%
30−33
+114%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−114%
30−33
+114%
Elden Ring 20
−125%
45−50
+125%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 27
−122%
60−65
+122%
Counter-Strike 2 11
−118%
24−27
+118%
Cyberpunk 2077 5
−100%
10−11
+100%
Forza Horizon 4 32
−134%
75−80
+134%
Metro Exodus 28
−132%
65−70
+132%
Red Dead Redemption 2 32
−134%
75−80
+134%
Valorant 24−27
−129%
55−60
+129%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
−117%
50−55
+117%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−133%
35−40
+133%
Cyberpunk 2077 4
−125%
9−10
+125%
Dota 2 51
−135%
120−130
+135%
Elden Ring 13
−131%
30−33
+131%
Far Cry 5 50
−120%
110−120
+120%
Fortnite 40−45
−133%
100−105
+133%
Forza Horizon 4 25
−120%
55−60
+120%
Grand Theft Auto V 35
−129%
80−85
+129%
Metro Exodus 17
−135%
40−45
+135%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85
−135%
200−210
+135%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
−114%
45−50
+114%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
−117%
50−55
+117%
Valorant 21
−114%
45−50
+114%
World of Tanks 120
−133%
280−290
+133%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 17
−135%
40−45
+135%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−133%
35−40
+133%
Cyberpunk 2077 3
−133%
7−8
+133%
Dota 2 76
−137%
180−190
+137%
Far Cry 5 40
−138%
95−100
+138%
Forza Horizon 4 19
−137%
45−50
+137%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
−137%
140−150
+137%
Valorant 24−27
−129%
55−60
+129%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%
Elden Ring 9−10
−133%
21−24
+133%
Grand Theft Auto V 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
−131%
90−95
+131%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−133%
14−16
+133%
World of Tanks 50−55
−126%
120−130
+126%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
−131%
30−33
+131%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
−110%
21−24
+110%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−100%
10−11
+100%
Far Cry 5 14−16
−133%
35−40
+133%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−114%
30−33
+114%
Metro Exodus 10−12
−118%
24−27
+118%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−133%
21−24
+133%
Valorant 18−20
−137%
45−50
+137%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Dota 2 18−20
−122%
40−45
+122%
Elden Ring 4−5
−125%
9−10
+125%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
−122%
40−45
+122%
Metro Exodus 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
−114%
45−50
+114%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−100%
10−11
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
−122%
40−45
+122%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
−133%
14−16
+133%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Dota 2 30
−133%
70−75
+133%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−133%
21−24
+133%
Fortnite 7−8
−129%
16−18
+129%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%
Valorant 7−8
−129%
16−18
+129%

This is how GeForce MX350 and R9 285 compete in popular games:

  • R9 285 is 122% faster in 1080p
  • R9 285 is 126% faster in 1440p
  • R9 285 is 131% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.31 17.37
Recency 10 February 2020 2 September 2014
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 20 Watt 190 Watt

GeForce MX350 has an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 850% lower power consumption.

R9 285, on the other hand, has a 137.6% higher aggregate performance score.

The Radeon R9 285 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce MX350 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce MX350 is a notebook card while Radeon R9 285 is a desktop one.


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 MX350
GeForce MX350
AMD Radeon R9 285
Radeon R9 285

Other comparisons

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 1639 votes

Rate GeForce MX350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 78 votes

Rate Radeon R9 285 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.