Radeon Vega 7 vs GeForce MX350

Place in the ranking	539	533
Place by popularity	not in top-100	12
Power efficiency	25.20	11.44
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	GCN 5.1 (2018−2022)
GPU code name	GP107	Cezanne
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	10 February 2020 (4 years ago)	13 April 2021 (3 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 cores	640	448
Core clock speed	747 MHz	300 MHz
Boost clock speed	937 MHz	1900 MHz
Number of transistors	3,300 million	9,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	20 Watt	45 Watt
Texture fill rate	29.98	53.20
Floating-point processing power	1.199 TFLOPS	1.702 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	8
TMUs	32	28

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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	IGP
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

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 type	GDDR5	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	System Shared
Memory bus width	64 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	1752 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	56.06 GB/s	no 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 Connectors

No 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.

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.4	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2
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.

GeForce MX350 7.32

Vega 7 7.48
+2.2%

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.

GeForce MX350 6166
+17.5%

Vega 7 5249

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.

GeForce MX350 4371
+30.6%

Vega 7 3348

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GeForce MX350 24744
+0.1%

Vega 7 24726

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

GeForce MX350 1336
+29.4%

Vega 7 1032

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 HD	27 +17.4%	23 −17.4%
1440p	31 +24%	25 −24%
4K	26 +73.3%	15 −73.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	14 −7.1%	14−16 +7.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Elden Ring	20 +42.9%	14 −42.9%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	27 +12.5%	24−27 −12.5%
Counter-Strike 2	11 −36.4%	14−16 +36.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	5 +0%	5−6 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	32 +10.3%	29 −10.3%
Metro Exodus	28 +33.3%	21 −33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	32 +18.5%	27 −18.5%
Valorant	24−27 −20.8%	29 +20.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 −4.3%	24−27 +4.3%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4 +0%	4−5 +0%
Dota 2	51 +200%	17 −200%
Elden Ring	13 −23.1%	16 +23.1%
Far Cry 5	50 +78.6%	28 −78.6%
Fortnite	40−45 −2.3%	40−45 +2.3%
Forza Horizon 4	25 +4.2%	24 −4.2%
Grand Theft Auto V	35 +0%	35−40 +0%
Metro Exodus	17 +13.3%	15 −13.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	85 +84.8%	46 −84.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Valorant	21 +50%	14 −50%
World of Tanks	120 +107%	58 −107%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	17 −41.2%	24−27 +41.2%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3 +0%	3−4 +0%
Dota 2	76 +1.3%	75−80 −1.3%
Far Cry 5	40 +21.2%	30−35 −21.2%
Forza Horizon 4	19 −10.5%	21 +10.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	55−60 −1.7%	60−65 +1.7%
Valorant	24−27 −4.2%	25 +4.2%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Elden Ring	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Grand Theft Auto V	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 +11.4%	35−40 −11.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
World of Tanks	50−55 −1.9%	50−55 +1.9%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry 5	14−16 −6.7%	16−18 +6.7%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Metro Exodus	10−12 −9.1%	12−14 +9.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Valorant	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Dota 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Elden Ring	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Metro Exodus	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 −4.8%	21−24 +4.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	30 +0%	30−33 +0%
Far Cry 5	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Fortnite	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Valorant	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%

This is how GeForce MX350 and Vega 7 compete in popular games:

GeForce MX350 is 17% faster in 1080p
GeForce MX350 is 24% faster in 1440p
GeForce MX350 is 73% faster in 4K

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

in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GeForce MX350 is 200% faster.
in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Vega 7 is 41% faster.

All in all, in popular games: