Radeon HD 7500G vs GeForce GTS 350M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTS 350M with Radeon HD 7500G, including specs and performance data.

GTS 350M
2010
1 GB GDDR3, 28 Watt
1.05
+31.3%

GTS 350M outperforms HD 7500G by a substantial 31% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking10891142
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.593.25
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)
GPU code nameGT215Devastator Lite
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date7 January 2010 (14 years ago)15 May 2012 (12 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 cores96256
Core clock speed500 MHz327 MHz
Boost clock speedno data424 MHz
Number of transistors727 million1,303 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm32 nm
Power consumption (TDP)28 Watt17 Watt
Texture fill rate16.006.784
Floating-point processing power0.24 TFLOPS0.2171 TFLOPS
Gigaflops360no data
ROPs88
TMUs3216

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).

Laptop sizelargeno data
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfaceMXM-IIIGP
Widthno dataIGP
SLI options+-
MXM TypeMXM 3.0 Type-Bno data

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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speedUp to 2000 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth51.2 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsDisplayPortLVDSHDMIDual Link DVISingle Link DVIVGANo outputs
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

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

Power management8.0no 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
OpenGL2.14.4
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.

GTS 350M 1.05
+31.3%
HD 7500G 0.80

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.

GTS 350M 407
+32.6%
HD 7500G 307

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+3.2%
30−35
−3.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+3.2%
30−35
−3.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+3.2%
30−35
−3.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Far Cry New Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTS 350M is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTS 350M is ahead in 15 tests (43%)
  • there's a draw in 20 tests (57%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.05 0.80
Recency 7 January 2010 15 May 2012
Chip lithography 40 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 28 Watt 17 Watt

GTS 350M has a 31.3% higher aggregate performance score.

HD 7500G, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 25% more advanced lithography process, and 64.7% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTS 350M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7500G in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTS 350M is a notebook card while Radeon HD 7500G is a desktop one.


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 GTS 350M
GeForce GTS 350M
AMD Radeon HD 7500G
Radeon HD 7500G

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.


3.6 7 votes

Rate GeForce GTS 350M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 68 votes

Rate Radeon HD 7500G 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.