Radeon R7 350 vs Quadro P4000

Place in the ranking	183	597
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	17.40	no data
Power efficiency	19.87	7.03
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code name	GP104	Cape Verde
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Release date	6 February 2017 (7 years ago)	6 July 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$815	no data

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 cores	1792	512
Core clock speed	1202 MHz	800 MHz
Boost clock speed	1480 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	7,200 million	1,500 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	55 Watt
Texture fill rate	165.8	25.60
Floating-point processing power	5.304 TFLOPS	0.8192 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	16
TMUs	112	32

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	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	241 mm	168 mm
Width	1-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	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	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1901 MHz	1125 MHz
Memory bandwidth	192 GB/s	72 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 Connectors	4x DisplayPort	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI	-	+
Display Port	1.4	no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus	+	-
3D Stereo	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
nView Display Management	+	no data
Optimus	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12	12 (11_1)
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	+	1.2.131
CUDA	6.1	-

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

66
+450%

12−14

−450%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

12.35

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

50−55

+467%

9−10
−467%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	65−70 +442%	12−14 −442%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	50−55 +478%	9−10 −478%
Battlefield 5	95−100 +444%	18−20 −444%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	60−65 +520%	10−11 −520%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +467%	9−10 −467%
Far Cry 5	65−70 +467%	12−14 −467%
Far Cry New Dawn	75−80 +450%	14−16 −450%
Forza Horizon 4	160−170 +450%	30−33 −450%
Hitman 3	60−65 +530%	10−11 −530%
Horizon Zero Dawn	130−140 +454%	24−27 −454%
Metro Exodus	100−110 +467%	18−20 −467%
Red Dead Redemption 2	75−80 +443%	14−16 −443%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	100−110 +483%	18−20 −483%
Watch Dogs: Legion	110−120 +443%	21−24 −443%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	65−70 +442%	12−14 −442%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	50−55 +478%	9−10 −478%
Battlefield 5	95−100 +444%	18−20 −444%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	60−65 +520%	10−11 −520%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +467%	9−10 −467%
Far Cry 5	65−70 +467%	12−14 −467%
Far Cry New Dawn	75−80 +450%	14−16 −450%
Forza Horizon 4	160−170 +450%	30−33 −450%
Hitman 3	60−65 +530%	10−11 −530%
Horizon Zero Dawn	130−140 +454%	24−27 −454%
Metro Exodus	100−110 +467%	18−20 −467%
Red Dead Redemption 2	75−80 +443%	14−16 −443%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	100−110 +483%	18−20 −483%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	60−65 +540%	10−11 −540%
Watch Dogs: Legion	110−120 +443%	21−24 −443%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	65−70 +442%	12−14 −442%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	50−55 +478%	9−10 −478%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	60−65 +520%	10−11 −520%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +467%	9−10 −467%
Far Cry 5	65−70 +467%	12−14 −467%
Forza Horizon 4	160−170 +450%	30−33 −450%
Hitman 3	60−65 +530%	10−11 −530%
Horizon Zero Dawn	130−140 +454%	24−27 −454%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	100−110 +483%	18−20 −483%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	41 +486%	7−8 −486%
Watch Dogs: Legion	110−120 +443%	21−24 −443%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

75−80
+443%

14−16

−443%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	55−60 +470%	10−11 −470%
Far Cry New Dawn	45−50 +475%	8−9 −475%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−35 +540%	5−6 −540%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 +520%	5−6 −520%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 +483%	6−7 −483%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +600%	3−4 −600%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +483%	6−7 −483%
Forza Horizon 4	170−180 +480%	30−33 −480%
Hitman 3	35−40 +517%	6−7 −517%
Horizon Zero Dawn	60−65 +530%	10−11 −530%
Metro Exodus	55−60 +470%	10−11 −470%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	65−70 +475%	12−14 −475%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 +471%	7−8 −471%
Watch Dogs: Legion	160−170 +440%	30−33 −440%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

50−55

+467%

9−10
−467%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	30−33 +500%	5−6 −500%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 +500%	4−5 −500%
Hitman 3	24−27 +500%	4−5 −500%
Horizon Zero Dawn	150−160 +459%	27−30 −459%
Metro Exodus	35−40 +500%	6−7 −500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 +467%	6−7 −467%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16−18 +467%	3−4 −467%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +467%	3−4 −467%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +486%	7−8 −486%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 +457%	7−8 −457%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

24−27

+550%

4−5
−550%

This is how Quadro P4000 and R7 350 compete in popular games:

Quadro P4000 is 450% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	30.13	5.58
Recency	6 February 2017	6 July 2016
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	55 Watt

Quadro P4000 has a 440% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 months, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

R7 350, on the other hand, has 81.8% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P4000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 350 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P4000 is a workstation graphics 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.