Tegra X1 vs GeForce MX350
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 535 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 25.37 | no data |
| Architecture | Pascal (2016−2021) | Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019) |
| GPU code name | GP107 | GM20B |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 10 February 2020 (4 years ago) | no data (2024 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 | 256 |
| Core clock speed | 747 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 937 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 3,300 million | 2,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 20 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 20 Watt | 15 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 29.98 | 16.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.199 TFLOPS | 0.512 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 32 | 16 |
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 |
| Width | no data | IGP |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no 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 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 | - | no data |
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 | 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 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | no data |
| 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.
GeekBench 5 Vulkan
Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.
Pros & cons summary
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 20 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 20 Watt | 15 Watt |
GeForce MX350 has a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.
Tegra X1, on the other hand, has 33.3% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between GeForce MX350 and Tegra X1. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that GeForce MX350 is a notebook card while Tegra X1 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
