RTX A3000 Mobile vs Radeon R7 350

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 350 with RTX A3000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

R7 350
2016
2 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
5.12

RTX A3000 Mobile outperforms R7 350 by a whopping 494% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking668204
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency7.1533.36
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Ampere (2020−2025)
GPU code nameCape VerdeGA104
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date6 July 2016 (9 years ago)12 April 2021 (4 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 cores5124096
Core clock speed800 MHz600 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1230 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 million17,400 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt70 Watt
Texture fill rate25.60157.4
Floating-point processing power0.8192 TFLOPS10.08 TFLOPS
ROPs1664
TMUs32128
Tensor Coresno data128
Ray Tracing Coresno data32
L1 Cache128 KB4 MB
L2 Cache256 KB4 MB

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB6 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1125 MHz1375 MHz
Memory bandwidth72 GB/s264.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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 DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA-8.6
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 HD16−18
−531%
101
+531%
1440p8−9
−525%
50
+525%
4K7−8
−543%
45
+543%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 77
+0%
77
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 66
+0%
66
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Far Cry 5 111
+0%
111
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 53
+0%
53
+0%
Dota 2 142
+0%
142
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Far Cry 5 103
+0%
103
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 124
+0%
124
+0%
Metro Exodus 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 151
+0%
151
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 43
+0%
43
+0%
Dota 2 132
+0%
132
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Far Cry 5 93
+0%
93
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 61
+0%
61
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 62
+0%
62
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27
+0%
27
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Far Cry 5 69
+0%
69
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 49
+0%
49
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45
+0%
45
+0%
Valorant 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Dota 2 77
+0%
77
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 36
+0%
36
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

This is how R7 350 and RTX A3000 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX A3000 Mobile is 531% faster in 1080p
  • RTX A3000 Mobile is 525% faster in 1440p
  • RTX A3000 Mobile is 543% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.12 30.42
Recency 6 July 2016 12 April 2021
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 70 Watt

R7 350 has 27.3% lower power consumption.

RTX A3000 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 494.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX A3000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 350 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 350 is a desktop graphics card while RTX A3000 Mobile is a mobile workstation 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
NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile
RTX A3000 Mobile

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.


3.8 562 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 164 votes

Rate RTX A3000 Mobile 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 RTX A3000 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.