Radeon R7 M350 vs R7 250

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

R7 250
2013
2048 MB DDR3, GDDR5
2.77

R7 M350 outperforms R7 250 by 2% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking760753
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money0.10no data
ArchitectureGCN (2011−2017)GCN 3.0 (2014−2017)
GPU code nameOland XTMeso
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date1 October 2013 (10 years old)5 May 2015 (8 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)$89 no data
Current price$256 (2.9x MSRP)no data

Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Technical specs

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 cores384384
Compute unitsno data6
Core clock speedno data725 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHz825 MHz
Number of transistors950 million1,550 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate25.2024.36
Floating-point performance716.8 gflops779.5 gflops

Size and 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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0PCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x8
Length168 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsN/Ano data

Memory

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 typeDDR3, GDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1150 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth72 GB/s16 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

Video outputs and ports

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 VGANo outputs
Eyefinityno data1
HDMI+no data
DisplayPort support-no data

Technologies

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

AppAcceleration+-
CrossFire1no data
Enduro--
FreeSync11
HD3D-+
PowerTune-+
DualGraphicsno data1
TrueAudio--
ZeroCore-+
Switchable graphicsno data1
DDMA audio+no data

API support

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

DirectXDirectX® 12DirectX® 12
Shader Model5.16.0
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL1.2Not Listed
Mantle-+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

R7 250 2.77
R7 M350 2.82
+1.8%

R7 M350 outperforms R7 250 by 2% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

R7 250 1073
R7 M350 1092
+1.8%

R7 M350 outperforms R7 250 by 2% in Passmark.

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 HD19
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hitman 3 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

This is how R7 250 and R7 M350 compete in popular games:

1080p resolution:

  • R7 250 is 5.6% faster than R7 M350

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 2.77 2.82
Recency 1 October 2013 5 May 2015
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 35 Watt

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon R7 250 and Radeon R7 M350.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon R7 250
Radeon R7 250
AMD Radeon R7 M350
Radeon R7 M350

Similar GPU comparisons

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

User Ratings

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


3.6 406 votes

Rate Radeon R7 250 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 59 votes

Rate Radeon R7 M350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.