Arc A580 vs Radeon R7 350

Place in the ranking	615	187
Place by popularity	not in top-100	55
Power efficiency	6.98	12.18
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)	Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code name	Cape Verde	DG2-512
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	6 July 2016 (8 years ago)	10 October 2023 (1 year 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	3072
Core clock speed	800 MHz	1700 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2000 MHz
Number of transistors	1,500 million	21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	175 Watt
Texture fill rate	25.60	384.0
Floating-point processing power	0.8192 TFLOPS	12.29 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	96
TMUs	32	192
Tensor Cores	no data	384
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	24

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 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	168 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	2x 8-pin

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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1125 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	72 GB/s	512.0 GB/s
Resizable BAR	-	+

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	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI	+	+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.6
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3
DLSS	-	+

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 HD	18−20 −489%	106 +489%
1440p	9−10 −500%	54 +500%
4K	5−6 −560%	33 +560%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart	149 +0%	149 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	98 +0%	98 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	73 +0%	73 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart	110 +0%	110 +0%
Battlefield 5	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	83 +0%	83 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	65 +0%	65 +0%
Far Cry 5	134 +0%	134 +0%
Fortnite	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	107 +0%	107 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Valorant	180−190 +0%	180−190 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart	79 +0%	79 +0%
Battlefield 5	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	74 +0%	74 +0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	270−280 +0%	270−280 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	57 +0%	57 +0%
Far Cry 5	122 +0%	122 +0%
Fortnite	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	102 +0%	102 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	86 +0%	86 +0%
Metro Exodus	97 +0%	97 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	174 +0%	174 +0%
Valorant	180−190 +0%	180−190 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	67 +0%	67 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	53 +0%	53 +0%
Far Cry 5	114 +0%	114 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	87 +0%	87 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	68 +0%	68 +0%
Valorant	180−190 +0%	180−190 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite

130−140

+0%

130−140

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	200−210 +0%	200−210 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	37 +0%	37 +0%
Metro Exodus	57 +0%	57 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Valorant	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	39 +0%	39 +0%
Far Cry 5	87 +0%	87 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	75 +0%	75 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	55 +0%	55 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite

70−75

+0%

70−75

+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	38 +0%	38 +0%
Metro Exodus	37 +0%	37 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	61 +0%	61 +0%
Valorant	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10 +0%	10 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	21 +0%	21 +0%
Far Cry 5	47 +0%	47 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	56 +0%	56 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite

30−35

+0%

30−35

+0%

This is how R7 350 and Arc A580 compete in popular games:

Arc A580 is 489% faster in 1080p
Arc A580 is 500% faster in 1440p
Arc A580 is 560% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	5.60	31.11
Recency	6 July 2016	10 October 2023
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	175 Watt

R7 350 has 218.2% lower power consumption.

Arc A580, on the other hand, has a 455.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A580 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 350 in performance tests.