Radeon R7 350 vs Quadro M620

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M620 with Radeon R7 350, including specs and performance data.

Quadro M620
2017
2 GB GDDR5, 30 Watt
7.28
+30%

M620 outperforms R7 350 by a substantial 30% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking541605
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency16.747.03
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameGM107Cape Verde
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date11 January 2017 (8 years ago)6 July 2016 (8 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 cores512512
Core clock speed756 MHz800 MHz
Boost clock speed977 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,870 million1,500 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt55 Watt
Texture fill rate31.2625.60
Floating-point processing power1 TFLOPS0.8192 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs3232

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
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data168 mm
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz1125 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s72 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 outputs1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
3D Stereo+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (11_1)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.131
CUDA5.0-

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 HD29
+38.1%
21−24
−38.1%
4K12
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Elden Ring 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+43.8%
16−18
−43.8%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+38.1%
21−24
−38.1%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+35.7%
14−16
−35.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Valorant 24−27
+33.3%
18−20
−33.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+43.8%
16−18
−43.8%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Dota 2 24−27
+38.9%
18−20
−38.9%
Elden Ring 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+33.3%
24−27
−33.3%
Fortnite 40−45
+43.3%
30−33
−43.3%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+38.1%
21−24
−38.1%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+38.9%
18−20
−38.9%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+35.7%
14−16
−35.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 38
+40.7%
27−30
−40.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%
Valorant 24−27
+33.3%
18−20
−33.3%
World of Tanks 110−120
+31.8%
85−90
−31.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+43.8%
16−18
−43.8%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Dota 2 24−27
+38.9%
18−20
−38.9%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+33.3%
24−27
−33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+38.1%
21−24
−38.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+31.1%
45−50
−31.1%
Valorant 24−27
+33.3%
18−20
−33.3%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Elden Ring 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Grand Theft Auto V 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+30%
30−33
−30%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
World of Tanks 50−55
+32.5%
40−45
−32.5%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Valorant 18−20
+35.7%
14−16
−35.7%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Elden Ring 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Dota 2 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Fortnite 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Valorant 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%

This is how Quadro M620 and R7 350 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro M620 is 38% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro M620 is 33% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.28 5.60
Recency 11 January 2017 6 July 2016
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 55 Watt

Quadro M620 has a 30% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 months, and 83.3% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M620 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 350 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M620 is a mobile workstation card while Radeon R7 350 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 Quadro M620
Quadro M620
AMD Radeon R7 350
Radeon R7 350

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.


3.3 195 votes

Rate Quadro M620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 487 votes

Rate Radeon R7 350 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.