Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics vs Radeon R7 350

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking666not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency7.15no data
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Gen. 5 Arrandale (2010)
GPU code nameCape VerdeGMA HD
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date6 July 2016 (9 years ago)10 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 cores51212
Core clock speed800 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm45 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate25.60no data
Floating-point processing power0.8192 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs32no data
L1 Cache128 KBno data
L2 Cache256 KBno data

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 x16no data
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount2 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1125 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth72 GB/sno data
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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortno data
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_1)10
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.2.131-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 6 July 2016 10 January 2010
Chip lithography 28 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 35 Watt

R7 350 has an age advantage of 6 years, and a 60.7% more advanced lithography process.

Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics, on the other hand, has 57.1% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R7 350 and Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon R7 350 is a desktop graphics card while Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics is a notebook 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 R7 350
Radeon R7 350
Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics

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.


3.8 555 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 146 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R7 350 or Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.