GeForce MX350 vs Radeon R9 370

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 370 with GeForce MX350, including specs and performance data.

R9 370
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 110 Watt
10.57
+68.3%

R9 370 outperforms MX350 by an impressive 68% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking420556
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency7.6224.89
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameTrinidadGP107
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date5 May 2015 (9 years ago)10 February 2020 (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 cores1280640
Core clock speed925 MHz747 MHz
Boost clock speed975 MHz937 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 million3,300 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)110 Watt20 Watt
Texture fill rate78.0029.98
Floating-point processing power2.496 TFLOPS1.199 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs8032

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 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length221 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1400 MHz1752 MHz
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s56.06 GB/s
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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA-6.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

R9 370 10.57
+68.3%
GeForce MX350 6.28

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. 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.

R9 370 4722
+68.3%
GeForce MX350 2806

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

R9 370 5249
+20.1%
GeForce MX350 4371

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 HD45
+73.1%
26
−73.1%
1440p45−50
+66.7%
27
−66.7%
4K40−45
+53.8%
26
−53.8%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 66
+0%
66
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16
+0%
16
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 15
+0%
15
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 37
+0%
37
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 50
+0%
50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
+0%
11
+0%
Far Cry 5 27
+0%
27
+0%
Fortnite 82
+0%
82
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 37
+0%
37
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 25
+0%
25
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 8
+0%
8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 129
+0%
129
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30
+0%
30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24
+0%
24
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120
+0%
120
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6
+0%
6
+0%
Dota 2 83
+0%
83
+0%
Far Cry 5 23
+0%
23
+0%
Fortnite 43
+0%
43
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 26
+0%
26
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 16
+0%
16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 35
+0%
35
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 12
+0%
12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27
+0%
27
+0%
Valorant 116
+0%
116
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24
+0%
24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5
+0%
5
+0%
Dota 2 76
+0%
76
+0%
Far Cry 5 21
+0%
21
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 19
+0%
19
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16
+0%
16
+0%
Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 27
+0%
27
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 30
+0%
30
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

This is how R9 370 and GeForce MX350 compete in popular games:

  • R9 370 is 73% faster in 1080p
  • R9 370 is 67% faster in 1440p
  • R9 370 is 54% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.57 6.28
Recency 5 May 2015 10 February 2020
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 110 Watt 20 Watt

R9 370 has a 68.3% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GeForce MX350, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 450% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 370 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce MX350 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 370 is a desktop card while GeForce MX350 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 R9 370
Radeon R9 370
NVIDIA GeForce MX350
GeForce MX350

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.


4 431 vote

Rate Radeon R9 370 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 1673 votes

Rate GeForce MX350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 370 or GeForce MX350, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.