UHD Graphics 620 vs Radeon R7 350

Place in performance ranking	570	776
Place by popularity	not in top-100	22
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.92	0.73
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)	Gen. 9.5 (2017)
GPU code name	Cape Verde	Kaby-Lake-Refresh GT2
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	6 July 2016 (7 years ago)	1 September 2017 (6 years ago)
Current price	$142	$706

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R7 350 has 26% better value for money than UHD Graphics 620.

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 cores	512	24
Core clock speed	800 MHz	300 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1150 MHz
Number of transistors	1,500 million	189 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	15 Watt
Texture fill rate	25.60	27.60
Floating-point performance	819.2 gflops	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Radeon R7 350 and UHD Graphics 620 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x1
Length	168 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	no 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 type	GDDR5	LPDDR3/DDR4
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	32 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	4500 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	72 GB/s	no data
Shared memory	no data	+

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	No outputs
HDMI	+	no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Sync

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.1.103

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	27−30 +108%	13 −108%
1440p	35−40 +106%	17 −106%
4K	16−18 +100%	8 −100%

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	5.57	2.66
Recency	6 July 2016	1 September 2017
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	32 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	15 Watt