Radeon R7 M350 vs RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) and Radeon R7 M350, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
2020
15 Watt
9.00
+197%

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) outperforms R7 M350 by a whopping 197% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking488773
Place by popularity28not in top-100
Power efficiency41.405.97
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameVegaMeso
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date7 January 2020 (5 years ago)5 May 2015 (9 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 cores512384
Compute unitsno data6
Core clock speedno data1000 MHz
Boost clock speed2100 MHz825 MHz
Number of transistorsno data1,550 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rateno data24.36
Floating-point processing powerno data0.7795 TFLOPS
ROPsno data8
TMUsno data24

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).

Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x8

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 typeno dataDDR3
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data16 GB/s
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 Connectorsno dataPortable Device Dependent
Eyefinity-+

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync-+
HD3D-+
PowerTune-+
DualGraphics-+
ZeroCore-+
Switchable graphics-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_1DirectX® 12
Shader Modelno data6.5
OpenGLno data4.4
OpenCLno dataNot Listed
Mantle-+

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 HD23
+229%
7−8
−229%
1440p17
+240%
5−6
−240%
4K9
+200%
3−4
−200%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 13
+225%
4−5
−225%
Cyberpunk 2077 19
+217%
6−7
−217%
Elden Ring 18
+200%
6−7
−200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+222%
9−10
−222%
Counter-Strike 2 9
+200%
3−4
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 15
+200%
5−6
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 32
+220%
10−11
−220%
Metro Exodus 27
+200%
9−10
−200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 33
+230%
10−11
−230%
Valorant 44
+214%
14−16
−214%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+222%
9−10
−222%
Counter-Strike 2 9
+200%
3−4
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
+267%
3−4
−267%
Dota 2 29
+222%
9−10
−222%
Elden Ring 22
+214%
7−8
−214%
Far Cry 5 30
+200%
10−11
−200%
Fortnite 50−55
+231%
16−18
−231%
Forza Horizon 4 27
+200%
9−10
−200%
Grand Theft Auto V 19
+217%
6−7
−217%
Metro Exodus 19
+217%
6−7
−217%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 57
+217%
18−20
−217%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12
+200%
4−5
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+200%
9−10
−200%
Valorant 14
+250%
4−5
−250%
World of Tanks 48
+200%
16−18
−200%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+222%
9−10
−222%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+240%
5−6
−240%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
+200%
3−4
−200%
Dota 2 48
+200%
16−18
−200%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+217%
12−14
−217%
Forza Horizon 4 23
+229%
7−8
−229%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+238%
21−24
−238%
Valorant 37
+208%
12−14
−208%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 9
+200%
3−4
−200%
Elden Ring 12
+200%
4−5
−200%
Grand Theft Auto V 9
+200%
3−4
−200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 22
+214%
7−8
−214%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
World of Tanks 21
+200%
7−8
−200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+240%
5−6
−240%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Cyberpunk 2077 2 0−1
Far Cry 5 18−20
+217%
6−7
−217%
Forza Horizon 4 16
+220%
5−6
−220%
Metro Exodus 17
+240%
5−6
−240%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Valorant 39
+225%
12−14
−225%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Dota 2 10
+233%
3−4
−233%
Elden Ring 6
+200%
2−3
−200%
Grand Theft Auto V 10
+233%
3−4
−233%
Metro Exodus 6
+200%
2−3
−200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 13
+225%
4−5
−225%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10
+233%
3−4
−233%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Dota 2 18
+200%
6−7
−200%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Fortnite 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 9
+200%
3−4
−200%
Valorant 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%

This is how RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) and R7 M350 compete in popular games:

  • RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 229% faster in 1080p
  • RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 240% faster in 1440p
  • RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 200% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.00 3.03
Recency 7 January 2020 5 May 2015
Chip lithography 7 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 35 Watt

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) has a 197% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 M350 in performance tests.


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

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 RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
AMD Radeon R7 M350
Radeon R7 M350

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 1249 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 62 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

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