Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 vs Radeon HD 8350G

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1147not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.57no data
ArchitectureTeraScale 3 (2010−2013)Gen. 3 (2005)
GPU code nameScrapper LiteGMA 950
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date12 March 2013 (11 years ago)1 March 2005 (19 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 cores1284
Core clock speed514 MHzno data
Boost clock speed720 MHz250 MHz
Number of transistors1,303 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology32 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt7 Watt
Texture fill rate5.760no data
Floating-point processing power0.1843 TFLOPSno data
ROPs4no data
TMUs8no data

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
InterfaceIGPno 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 typeSystem Sharedno data
Maximum RAM amountSystem Sharedno data
Memory bus widthSystem Sharedno data
Memory clock speedSystem Sharedno 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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)no data
Shader Model5.0no data
OpenGL4.4no data
OpenCL1.2no data
VulkanN/A-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 12 March 2013 1 March 2005
Chip lithography 32 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 7 Watt

HD 8350G has an age advantage of 8 years, and a 306.3% more advanced lithography process.

Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950, on the other hand, has 400% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 8350G and Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950. We've got no test results to judge.


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.


AMD Radeon HD 8350G
Radeon HD 8350G
Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


2.9 16 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8350G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.2 76 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 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.