PG506-232 vs Radeon R7 350

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking597not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency7.03no data
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameCape VerdeGA100
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date6 July 2016 (8 years ago)12 April 2021 (3 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 cores5123584
Core clock speed800 MHz930 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1440 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 million54,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt165 Watt
Texture fill rate25.60322.6
Floating-point processing power0.8192 TFLOPS10.32 TFLOPS
ROPs1696
TMUs32224
Tensor Coresno data224

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 4.0 x16
Length168 mm267 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone8-pin EPS

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 typeGDDR5HBM2
Maximum RAM amount2 GB24 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit3072 Bit
Memory clock speed1125 MHz1215 MHz
Memory bandwidth72 GB/s933.1 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+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)N/A
Shader Model5.1N/A
OpenGL4.6N/A
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA-8.0

Pros & cons summary


Recency 6 July 2016 12 April 2021
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 24 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 165 Watt

R7 350 has 200% lower power consumption.

PG506-232, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R7 350 and PG506-232. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon R7 350 is a desktop card while PG506-232 is a 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 R7 350
Radeon R7 350
NVIDIA PG506-232
PG506-232

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.


3.8 474 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate PG506-232 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.