Radeon R7 350 vs GeForce GTX 860M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 860M with Radeon R7 350, including specs and performance data.

GTX 860M
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
7.92
+41.4%

GTX 860M outperforms R7 350 by a considerable 41% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking522606
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency7.277.01
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameGM107Cape Verde
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date13 January 2014 (11 years ago)6 July 2016 (8 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 cores1152 or 640512
Core clock speed797 MHz800 MHz
Boost clock speed1085 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,870 million1,500 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt55 Watt
Texture fill rate43.4025.60
Floating-point processing power1.389 TFLOPS0.8192 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs4032

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 sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportPCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data168 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone
SLI options+-

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
Standard memory configurationGDDR5no data
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 2500 MHz1125 MHz
Memory bandwidth80.0 GB/s72 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 outputs1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
eDP 1.2 signal supportUp to 3840x2160no data
LVDS signal supportUp to 1920x1200no data
VGA аnalog display supportUp to 2048x1536no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportUp to 3840x2160no data
HDMI++
HDCP content protection+-
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI+-
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming+-

Supported technologies

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

H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+-
Optimus+-
Ansel+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_1)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.11.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.131
CUDA+-

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:

900p91
+51.7%
60−65
−51.7%
Full HD36
+50%
24−27
−50%
4K14
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Elden Ring 21−24
+57.1%
14−16
−57.1%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+50%
14−16
−50%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+57.1%
14−16
−57.1%
Valorant 27−30
+50%
18−20
−50%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Dota 2 17
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
Elden Ring 21−24
+57.1%
14−16
−57.1%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+41.7%
24−27
−41.7%
Fortnite 45−50
+56.7%
30−33
−56.7%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%
Grand Theft Auto V 26
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+50%
14−16
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+57.5%
40−45
−57.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+57.1%
14−16
−57.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24
+50%
16−18
−50%
Valorant 27−30
+50%
18−20
−50%
World of Tanks 120−130
+50%
80−85
−50%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Dota 2 27−30
+55.6%
18−20
−55.6%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+41.7%
24−27
−41.7%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+57.5%
40−45
−57.5%
Valorant 27−30
+50%
18−20
−50%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Elden Ring 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+48.1%
27−30
−48.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
World of Tanks 55−60
+42.5%
40−45
−42.5%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Valorant 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Dota 2 18−20
+58.3%
12−14
−58.3%
Elden Ring 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+43.8%
16−18
−43.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Dota 2 18−20
+58.3%
12−14
−58.3%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Fortnite 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Valorant 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%

This is how GTX 860M and R7 350 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 860M is 52% faster in 900p
  • GTX 860M is 50% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 860M is 56% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.92 5.60
Recency 13 January 2014 6 July 2016
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 55 Watt

GTX 860M has a 41.4% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

R7 350, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and 36.4% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 860M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 350 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 860M is a notebook card while Radeon R7 350 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 GTX 860M
GeForce GTX 860M
AMD Radeon R7 350
Radeon R7 350

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.


3.7 453 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 860M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 487 votes

Rate Radeon R7 350 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.