Radeon R7 350 vs HD 4850

Place in performance ranking	777	570
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.17	0.81
Architecture	Terascale 1 (2008−2010)	GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code name	RV770	Cape Verde
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	25 June 2008 (16 years ago)	6 July 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$199	no data
Current price	$138 (0.7x MSRP)	$142

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R7 350 has 376% better value for money than ATI HD 4850.

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	800	512
Core clock speed	625 MHz	800 MHz
Number of transistors	956 million	1,500 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	110 Watt	55 Watt
Texture fill rate	25.00	25.60
Floating-point performance	1,000.0 gflops	819.2 gflops

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).

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	246 mm	168 mm
Width	1-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	None

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	GDDR3	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	2 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	993 MHz	4500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	63.55 GB/s	72 GB/s

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	2x DVI, 1x S-Video	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	10.1 (10_1)	12 (11_1)
Shader Model	4.1	5.1
OpenGL	3.3	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131

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:

900p	28 −96.4%	55−60 +96.4%
Full HD	38 −97.4%	75−80 +97.4%
1200p	19 −84.2%	35−40 +84.2%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

2−3

−150%

5−6
+150%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Battlefield 5	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −120%	10−12 +120%
Hitman 3	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −125%	18−20 +125%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −200%	6−7 +200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 −140%	12−14 +140%
Watch Dogs: Legion	7−8 −114%	14−16 +114%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Battlefield 5	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −120%	10−12 +120%
Hitman 3	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −125%	18−20 +125%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −200%	6−7 +200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 −140%	12−14 +140%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%
Watch Dogs: Legion	7−8 −114%	14−16 +114%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −120%	10−12 +120%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −125%	18−20 +125%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 −140%	12−14 +140%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%
Watch Dogs: Legion	7−8 −114%	14−16 +114%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−200%

6−7
+200%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	2−3
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	1−2
Far Cry 5	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Hitman 3	3−4 −167%	8−9 +167%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	0−1	2−3
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	1−2

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−200%

6−7
+200%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	0−1	1−2
Far Cry New Dawn	0−1	1−2
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	2−3
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	1−2
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	1−2
Far Cry 5	0−1	1−2
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Metro Exodus	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

1−2

−300%

4−5
+300%

This is how ATI HD 4850 and R7 350 compete in popular games:

R7 350 is 96% faster in 900p
R7 350 is 97% faster in 1080p
R7 350 is 84% faster in 1200p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.66	5.58
Recency	25 June 2008	6 July 2016
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	2 GB
Chip lithography	55 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	110 Watt	55 Watt