Radeon R7 M350 vs ATI HD 5830
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 5830 with Radeon R7 M350, including specs and performance data.
HD 5830 outperforms R7 M350 by an impressive 60% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 734 | 866 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 1.81 | 5.65 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) | GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) |
| GPU code name | Cypress | Meso |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 25 February 2010 (15 years ago) | 5 May 2015 (10 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 | 1120 | 384 |
| Compute units | no data | 6 |
| Core clock speed | 800 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 825 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 2,154 million | 1,550 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 175 Watt | 35 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 44.80 | 24.36 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.792 TFLOPS | 0.7795 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 8 |
| TMUs | 56 | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 112 KB | 96 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 128 KB |
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).
| Bus support | no data | PCIe 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Length | 282 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 6-pin | 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 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1000 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 128.0 GB/s | 16 GB/s |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | Portable Device Dependent |
| Eyefinity | - | + |
| HDMI | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| FreeSync | - | + |
| HD3D | - | + |
| PowerTune | - | + |
| DualGraphics | - | + |
| ZeroCore | - | + |
| Switchable graphics | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | DirectX® 12 |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | Not Listed |
| Vulkan | N/A | - |
| Mantle | - | + |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.12 | 2.57 |
| Recency | 25 February 2010 | 5 May 2015 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 175 Watt | 35 Watt |
ATI HD 5830 has a 60.3% higher aggregate performance score.
R7 M350, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 400% lower power consumption.
The Radeon HD 5830 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 M350 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon HD 5830 is a desktop graphics card while Radeon R7 M350 is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
