ATI Radeon X600 PRO vs GeForce MX350

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce MX350 with Radeon X600 PRO, including specs and performance data.

GeForce MX350
2020
2 GB GDDR5, 20 Watt
7.14
+4100%

MX350 outperforms ATI X600 PRO by a whopping 4100% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking5471417
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency25.070.33
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Rage 9 (2003−2006)
GPU code nameGP107RV380
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date10 February 2020 (5 years ago)1 September 2004 (20 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 cores640no data
Core clock speed747 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed937 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,300 million75 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)20 Watt36 Watt
Texture fill rate29.981.600
Floating-point processing power1.199 TFLOPSno data
ROPs164
TMUs324

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 1.0 x16
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5DDR
Maximum RAM amount2 GB128 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1752 MHz300 MHz
Memory bandwidth56.06 GB/s9.6 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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)9.0b
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.62.0
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
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.

GeForce MX350 7.14
+4100%
ATI X600 PRO 0.17

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 2809
+4093%
ATI X600 PRO 67

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 HD270−1
1440p310−1
4K260−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 31 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 14 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 16 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 24 0−1
Battlefield 5 37 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 11 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 11 0−1
Far Cry 5 27 0−1
Fortnite 82
+8100%
1−2
−8100%
Forza Horizon 4 37 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 21 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27 0−1
Valorant 129
+4200%
3−4
−4200%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 7 0−1
Battlefield 5 30 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 14−16 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120
+5900%
2−3
−5900%
Cyberpunk 2077 6 0−1
Dota 2 83
+8200%
1−2
−8200%
Far Cry 5 23 0−1
Fortnite 43
+4200%
1−2
−4200%
Forza Horizon 4 26 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 16−18 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 35 0−1
Metro Exodus 12 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27 0−1
Valorant 116
+5700%
2−3
−5700%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 14−16 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 5 0−1
Dota 2 76
+7500%
1−2
−7500%
Far Cry 5 21 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 19 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 16−18 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16 0−1
Valorant 70−75
+7300%
1−2
−7300%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 27 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 50−55
+5200%
1−2
−5200%
Grand Theft Auto V 9−10 0−1
Metro Exodus 6−7 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40 0−1
Valorant 75−80
+7700%
1−2
−7700%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 9−10 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6 0−1
Far Cry 5 14−16 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 16−18 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 10−12 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 14−16 0−1

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 6−7 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 1−2 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20 0−1
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6 0−1
Valorant 35−40 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Dota 2 30 0−1
Far Cry 5 7−8 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 10−12 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 4−5 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 7−8 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.14 0.17
Recency 10 February 2020 1 September 2004
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 128 MB
Chip lithography 14 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 20 Watt 36 Watt

GeForce MX350 has a 4100% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 828.6% more advanced lithography process, and 80% lower power consumption.

The GeForce MX350 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X600 PRO in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce MX350 is a notebook card while Radeon X600 PRO is a desktop one.

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
ATI Radeon X600 PRO
Radeon X600 PRO

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 1655 votes

Rate GeForce MX350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 11 votes

Rate Radeon X600 PRO on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce MX350 or Radeon X600 PRO, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.