UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) vs Radeon R7 350

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
HD 7730 HD 7750 HD 7770 HD 8730 OEM HD 8740 OEM HD 8760 OEM R7 250E R7 250X R7 350 R7 350 640SP R7 450 OEM R9 255 OEM
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
(Jasper Lake 16 EU) (Jasper Lake 24 EU) (Jasper Lake 32 EU) G1 G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU) G4 P630 Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) Xe 750 32EUs Xe G1 Xe G4 48EUs

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 350 with UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU), including specs and performance data.

R7 350
2016
2 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
5.16
+143%

R7 350 outperforms Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) by a whopping 143% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
R7 350 R7 350
UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU)

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking673924
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency7.2216.32
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Gen. 11 (2021)
GPU code nameCape VerdeGen. 11
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date6 July 2016 (9 years ago)11 January 2021 (5 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 cores51224
Core clock speed800 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speedno data800 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt4.8 - 10 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+-

Supported technologies

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

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12_1
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.2.131-

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 HD30−35
+131%
13
−131%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 17
+0%
17
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8
+0%
8
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 16
+0%
16
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4
+0%
4
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how R7 350 and UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) compete in popular games:

  • R7 350 is 131% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 51 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 5.16 2.12
Recency 6 July 2016 11 January 2021
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 4 Watt

R7 350 has a 143% higher aggregate performance score.

UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 1275% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R7 350 is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 350 is a desktop graphics card while UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

R7 350 Radeon R7 350
vs
HD 7770 Radeon HD 7770
UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU)
vs
GT 640M GeForce GT 640M
R7 350 Radeon R7 350
vs
Radeon 550 Radeon 550
R7 350 Radeon R7 350
vs
Pro Vega 20 Pro Vega 20
R7 350 Radeon R7 350
vs
RX 590 RX 590
R7 350 Radeon R7 350
vs
RX 5300 XT RX 5300 XT
R7 350 Radeon R7 350
vs
MX450 N18S-G5 GeForce MX450 N18S-G5
R7 350 Radeon R7 350
vs
GTX 750 GM206 GTX 750 GM206
R7 350 Radeon R7 350
vs
T400 Mobile Quadro T400 Mobile
R7 350 Radeon R7 350
vs
RTX A3000 Mobile RTX A3000 Mobile
R7 350 Radeon R7 350
vs
RTX 3080 12 GB RTX 3080 12 GB
R7 350 Radeon R7 350
vs
RX 7700 XT RX 7700 XT
R7 350 Radeon R7 350
vs
L40G L40G

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.8 583 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 60 votes

Rate UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) 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 UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.