GeForce MX350 vs Radeon Pro 5300M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro 5300M with GeForce MX350, including specs and performance data.

Pro 5300M
2019
4 GB GDDR6, 85 Watt
15.42
+111%

Pro 5300M outperforms MX350 by a whopping 111% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking345538
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency12.4325.01
ArchitectureRDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameNavi 14GP107
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date13 November 2019 (5 years ago)10 February 2020 (4 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 cores1280640
Core clock speed1000 MHz747 MHz
Boost clock speed1250 MHz937 MHz
Number of transistors6,400 million3,300 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)85 Watt20 Watt
Texture fill rate100.029.98
Floating-point processing power3.2 TFLOPS1.199 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs8032

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x16
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 typeGDDR6GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz1752 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.0 GB/s56.06 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 outputsNo outputs

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_1)
Shader Model6.56.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA-6.1

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.

Pro 5300M 15.42
+111%
GeForce MX350 7.30

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.

Pro 5300M 5940
+111%
GeForce MX350 2811

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 HD50−55
+92.3%
26
−92.3%
1440p65−70
+110%
31
−110%
4K50−55
+100%
25
−100%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+100%
12−14
−100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+59.1%
22
−59.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+92.3%
13
−92.3%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+138%
21−24
−138%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+63.2%
19
−63.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+100%
12−14
−100%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+38.5%
26
−38.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+20%
35
−20%
Forza Horizon 4 100−105
+108%
45−50
−108%
Hitman 3 27−30
+45%
20
−45%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
−65.4%
129
+65.4%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+43.2%
37
−43.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+31.3%
32
−31.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+108%
24−27
−108%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
−20.3%
95
+20.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+34.6%
26
−34.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+317%
6
−317%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+138%
21−24
−138%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+82.4%
17
−82.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+100%
12−14
−100%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+56.5%
23
−56.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+68%
25
−68%
Forza Horizon 4 100−105
+108%
45−50
−108%
Hitman 3 27−30
+45%
20
−45%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
−48.7%
116
+48.7%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+89.3%
28
−89.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+75%
24
−75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+100%
25
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+68.2%
21−24
−68.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
−11.4%
88
+11.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+338%
8
−338%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+150%
10−11
−150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+417%
6
−417%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+100%
12−14
−100%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+140%
15
−140%
Forza Horizon 4 100−105
+426%
19
−426%
Hitman 3 27−30
+70.6%
17
−70.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+290%
20
−290%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+163%
19
−163%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+131%
16
−131%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+1217%
6
−1217%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+110%
20
−110%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
+114%
14−16
−114%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+118%
10−12
−118%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+114%
7−8
−114%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+143%
7−8
−143%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+125%
8−9
−125%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+212%
24−27
−212%
Hitman 3 18−20
+63.6%
10−12
−63.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+107%
14−16
−107%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+238%
8−9
−238%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+460%
5−6
−460%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+167%
6−7
−167%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
+107%
45−50
−107%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+108%
12−14
−108%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+150%
6−7
−150%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Hitman 3 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+225%
24−27
−225%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+163%
8−9
−163%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+650%
2−3
−650%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+100%
7−8
−100%

This is how Pro 5300M and GeForce MX350 compete in popular games:

  • Pro 5300M is 92% faster in 1080p
  • Pro 5300M is 110% faster in 1440p
  • Pro 5300M is 100% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro 5300M is 1217% faster.
  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GeForce MX350 is 65% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Pro 5300M is ahead in 68 tests (94%)
  • GeForce MX350 is ahead in 4 tests (6%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.42 7.30
Recency 13 November 2019 10 February 2020
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 7 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 85 Watt 20 Watt

Pro 5300M has a 111.2% higher aggregate performance score, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

GeForce MX350, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 months, and 325% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro 5300M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce MX350 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro 5300M is a mobile workstation card while GeForce MX350 is a mobile workstation 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.


AMD Radeon Pro 5300M
Radeon Pro 5300M
NVIDIA GeForce MX350
GeForce MX350

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4 170 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 5300M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 1626 votes

Rate GeForce MX350 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.