UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) vs Radeon R7 350

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 350 with UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H), including specs and performance data.

R7 350
2016
2 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
5.54
+143%

R7 350 outperforms UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) by a whopping 143% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking615864
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency6.99no data
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Gen. 12 (2021−2023)
GPU code nameCape VerdeTiger Lake Xe
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date6 July 2016 (8 years ago)30 March 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 cores51216
Core clock speed800 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1450 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Wattno data
Texture fill rate25.60no data
Floating-point processing power0.8192 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs32no 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

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 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 compatibility

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 HD24−27
+118%
11
−118%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 7
+0%
7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Battlefield 5 10
+0%
10
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 8
+0%
8
+0%
Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 23
+0%
23
+0%
Far Cry 5 7
+0%
7
+0%
Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 6
+0%
6
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9
+0%
9
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 22
+0%
22
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5
+0%
5
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

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

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

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

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how R7 350 and UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) compete in popular games:

  • R7 350 is 118% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 58 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.54 2.28
Recency 6 July 2016 30 March 2021
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm

R7 350 has a 143% higher aggregate performance score.

UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R7 350 is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 350 is a desktop card while UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) 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 UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H)
UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H)

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.


3.8 498 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1.4 363 votes

Rate UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R7 350 or UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.