Radeon R7 350 vs Pro 555

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro 555 with Radeon R7 350, including specs and performance data.

Pro 555
2017
2 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
7.51
+45.5%

Pro 555 outperforms R7 350 by a considerable 46% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking579673
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency7.717.22
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code namePolaris 21Cape Verde
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date5 June 2017 (8 years ago)6 July 2016 (9 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 cores768512
Core clock speed850 MHz800 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million1,500 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt55 Watt
Texture fill rate40.8025.60
Floating-point processing power1.306 TFLOPS0.8192 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs4832
L1 Cache192 KB128 KB
L2 Cache1024 KB256 KB

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
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 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 speed1275 MHz1125 MHz
Memory bandwidth81.6 GB/s72 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputs1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (11_1)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131

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:

Full HD32
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%
4K13
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+62.5%
24−27
−62.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 30−35
+57.1%
21−24
−57.1%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+62.5%
24−27
−62.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Far Cry 5 26
+62.5%
16−18
−62.5%
Fortnite 82
+49.1%
55−60
−49.1%
Forza Horizon 4 31
+47.6%
21−24
−47.6%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+64.3%
14−16
−64.3%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24
+50%
16−18
−50%
Valorant 80−85
+60%
50−55
−60%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 30−35
+57.1%
21−24
−57.1%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+62.5%
24−27
−62.5%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
+51.3%
80−85
−51.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Dota 2 55−60
+65.7%
35−40
−65.7%
Far Cry 5 24
+50%
16−18
−50%
Fortnite 29
+61.1%
18−20
−61.1%
Forza Horizon 4 26
+62.5%
16−18
−62.5%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+64.3%
14−16
−64.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 29
+61.1%
18−20
−61.1%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21
+50%
14−16
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 23
+64.3%
14−16
−64.3%
Valorant 80−85
+60%
50−55
−60%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 30−35
+57.1%
21−24
−57.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Dota 2 57
+62.9%
35−40
−62.9%
Far Cry 5 22
+57.1%
14−16
−57.1%
Forza Horizon 4 18
+50%
12−14
−50%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 13
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Valorant 80−85
+60%
50−55
−60%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 23
+64.3%
14−16
−64.3%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 55−60
+65.7%
35−40
−65.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+55.6%
27−30
−55.6%
Valorant 85−90
+54.5%
55−60
−54.5%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 1−2 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Hogwarts Legacy 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Valorant 35−40
+62.5%
24−27
−62.5%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Dota 2 27−30
+55.6%
18−20
−55.6%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Hogwarts Legacy 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%

This is how Pro 555 and R7 350 compete in popular games:

  • Pro 555 is 52% faster in 1080p
  • Pro 555 is 63% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.51 5.16
Recency 5 June 2017 6 July 2016
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 55 Watt

Pro 555 has a 45.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 months, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

R7 350, on the other hand, has 36.4% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro 555 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 350 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro 555 is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon R7 350 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.


AMD Radeon Pro 555
Radeon Pro 555
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.


3.6 98 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 555 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 581 votes

Rate Radeon R7 350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Pro 555 or Radeon R7 350, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.