Radeon HD 6350 vs GeForce GT 220

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 220 and Radeon HD 6350, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GT 220
2009
1 GB GDDR3, 58 Watt
0.57
+58.3%

GT 220 outperforms HD 6350 by an impressive 58% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking12101274
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.691.32
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameGT216Park
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date12 October 2009 (15 years ago)7 February 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$79.99 $23

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores4880
Core clock speed625 MHz650 MHz
Number of transistors486 million292 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)58 Watt19 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate9.8405.200
Floating-point processing power0.1277 TFLOPS0.104 TFLOPS
ROPs84
TMUs168

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 supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length168 mm168 mm
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width1-slot1-slot
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 typeGDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB512 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed790 MHz400 MHz
Memory bandwidth25.3 GB/s6.4 GB/s

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 ConnectorsVGADVIHDMI1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.3a
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIF + HDAno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model4.15.0
OpenGL3.14.4
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+-

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.

GT 220 0.57
+58.3%
HD 6350 0.36

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.

GT 220 219
+56.4%
HD 6350 140

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 HD21
+75%
12−14
−75%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.811.92

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+66.7%
18−20
−66.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+66.7%
18−20
−66.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Hitman 3 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+66.7%
18−20
−66.7%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

This is how GT 220 and HD 6350 compete in popular games:

  • GT 220 is 75% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.57 0.36
Recency 12 October 2009 7 February 2011
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 512 MB
Power consumption (TDP) 58 Watt 19 Watt

GT 220 has a 58.3% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

HD 6350, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 205.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GT 220 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6350 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.


NVIDIA GeForce GT 220
GeForce GT 220
AMD Radeon HD 6350
Radeon HD 6350

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.


3.1 757 votes

Rate GeForce GT 220 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 64 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6350 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.