GeForce MX350 vs Arc Graphics 130V

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Arc Graphics 130V and GeForce MX350, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Arc Graphics 130V
16 GB LPDDR5x
11.61
+59.3%

Arc Graphics 130V outperforms MX350 by an impressive 59% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking413538
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data24.99
ArchitectureXe² (2024)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameLunar Lake iGPUGP107
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release dateno data10 February 2020 (4 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 cores7640
Core clock speedno data747 MHz
Boost clock speed1850 MHz937 MHz
Number of transistorsno data3,300 million
Manufacturing process technology3 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data20 Watt
Texture fill rateno data29.98
Floating-point processing powerno data1.199 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data32

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeLPDDR5xGDDR5
Maximum RAM amount16 GB2 GB
Memory bus widthno data64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1752 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data56.06 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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_212 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.2.131
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. 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.

Arc Graphics 130V 11.61
+59.3%
GeForce MX350 7.29

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.

Arc Graphics 130V 4474
+59.2%
GeForce MX350 2811

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Arc Graphics 130V 9523
+54.4%
GeForce MX350 6166

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.

Arc Graphics 130V 8255
+88.9%
GeForce MX350 4371

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

Arc Graphics 130V 3242
+143%
GeForce MX350 1336

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 HD31
+19.2%
26
−19.2%
1440p45−50
+45.2%
31
−45.2%
4K35−40
+40%
25
−40%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 22
+0%
22
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 13
+0%
13
+0%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 19
+0%
19
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 26
+0%
26
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 35
+0%
35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Hitman 3 20
+0%
20
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 129
+0%
129
+0%
Metro Exodus 37
+0%
37
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 32
+0%
32
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95
+0%
95
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 26
+0%
26
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6
+0%
6
+0%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 17
+0%
17
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 23
+0%
23
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 25
+0%
25
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Hitman 3 20
+0%
20
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 116
+0%
116
+0%
Metro Exodus 28
+0%
28
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24
+0%
24
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 25
+0%
25
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 88
+0%
88
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8
+0%
8
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6
+0%
6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 15
+0%
15
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 19
+0%
19
+0%
Hitman 3 17
+0%
17
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20
+0%
20
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 19
+0%
19
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16
+0%
16
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6
+0%
6
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 20
+0%
20
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Hitman 3 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Hitman 3 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

This is how Arc Graphics 130V and GeForce MX350 compete in popular games:

  • Arc Graphics 130V is 19% faster in 1080p
  • Arc Graphics 130V is 45% faster in 1440p
  • Arc Graphics 130V is 40% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.61 7.29
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 3 nm 14 nm

Arc Graphics 130V has a 59.3% higher aggregate performance score, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc Graphics 130V is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce MX350 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.


Intel Arc Graphics 130V
Arc Graphics 130V
NVIDIA GeForce MX350
GeForce MX350

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.3 7 votes

Rate Arc Graphics 130V on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 1626 votes

Rate GeForce MX350 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.