GeForce GTS 350M vs Radeon HD 7770M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 7770M and GeForce GTS 350M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
HD 7770M outperforms GTS 350M by a whopping 224% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 732 | 1096 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 7.39 | 2.61 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2011−2020) | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) |
| GPU code name | Chelsea | GT215 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 24 April 2012 (12 years ago) | 7 January 2010 (15 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 cores | 512 | 96 |
| Core clock speed | 675 MHz | 500 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,500 million | 727 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 32 Watt | 28 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 21.60 | 16.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.6912 TFLOPS | 0.24 TFLOPS |
| Gigaflops | no data | 360 |
| ROPs | 16 | 8 |
| TMUs | 32 | 32 |
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 size | medium sized | large |
| Bus support | no data | PCI-E 2.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | MXM-II |
| SLI options | - | + |
| MXM Type | no data | MXM 3.0 Type-B |
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 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1000 MHz | Up to 2000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 64 GB/s | 51.2 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 Connectors | No outputs | DisplayPortLVDSHDMIDual Link DVISingle Link DVIVGA |
| HDMI | - | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Power management | no data | 8.0 |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 11.1 (10_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 4.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
| CUDA | - | + |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+100%
|
4−5
−100%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+100%
|
4−5
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+100%
|
8−9
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7−8
+250%
|
2−3
−250%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 12−14
+100%
|
6−7
−100%
|
| Valorant | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+100%
|
4−5
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20
+111%
|
9−10
−111%
|
| Fortnite | 18−20
+375%
|
4−5
−375%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+100%
|
8−9
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 7−8
+250%
|
2−3
−250%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+158%
|
12−14
−158%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 12−14
+100%
|
6−7
−100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
+100%
|
6−7
−100%
|
| Valorant | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| World of Tanks | 60−65
+150%
|
24−27
−150%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+100%
|
4−5
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20
+111%
|
9−10
−111%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+100%
|
8−9
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+158%
|
12−14
−158%
|
| Valorant | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 24−27
+300%
|
6−7
−300%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| World of Tanks | 24−27
+380%
|
5−6
−380%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
| Valorant | 10−11
+66.7%
|
6−7
−66.7%
|
4K
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
+233%
|
3−4
−233%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in World of Tanks, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the HD 7770M is 380% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- HD 7770M is ahead in 33 tests (94%)
- there's a draw in 2 tests (6%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.43 | 1.06 |
| Recency | 24 April 2012 | 7 January 2010 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 32 Watt | 28 Watt |
HD 7770M has a 223.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.
GTS 350M, on the other hand, has 14.3% lower power consumption.
The Radeon HD 7770M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTS 350M in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
