GeForce GT 710M vs Radeon R7 350

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

R7 350
2016
2 GB GDDR5
5.56
+383%

Radeon R7 350 outperforms GeForce GT 710M by 383% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary Details

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

Place in performance ranking5671030
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation1.000.49
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameCape VerdeGF117
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date6 July 2016 (7 years ago)9 January 2013 (11 years ago)
Current price$142 $23

Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R7 350 has 104% better value for money than GT 710M.

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 cores51296
Core clock speed800 MHz775 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 million585 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate25.6012.40
Floating-point performance819.2 gflops297.6 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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

Memory typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB1 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed4500 MHz1800 MHz
Memory bandwidth72 GB/s14.4 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+no data

API Compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDAno data2.1

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & Cons Summary


Performance score 5.56 1.15
Recency 6 July 2016 9 January 2013
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 1 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 15 Watt

The Radeon R7 350 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 710M in performance tests.


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 R7 350
Radeon R7 350
NVIDIA GeForce GT 710M
GeForce GT 710M

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 rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.8 439 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 173 votes

Rate GeForce GT 710M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & Сomments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.