Arc A310 vs Radeon R7 350

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 350 and Arc A310, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R7 350
2016
2 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
5.59

Arc A310 outperforms R7 350 by a whopping 156% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking604366
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency6.9913.12
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameCape VerdeDG2-128
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date6 July 2016 (8 years ago)12 October 2022 (2 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 cores512768
Core clock speed800 MHz2000 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2000 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate25.6064.00
Floating-point processing power0.8192 TFLOPS3.072 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs3232
Tensor Coresno data96
Ray Tracing Coresno data6

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1125 MHz1937 MHz
Memory bandwidth72 GB/s124.0 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3

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 HD14−16
−164%
37
+164%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Hitman 3 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Hitman 3 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65
+0%
65
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Hitman 3 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 54
+0%
54
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
+0%
29
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Hitman 3 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Hitman 3 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

This is how R7 350 and Arc A310 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A310 is 164% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 66 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.59 14.31
Recency 6 July 2016 12 October 2022
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 75 Watt

R7 350 has 36.4% lower power consumption.

Arc A310, on the other hand, has a 156% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A310 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 350 in performance tests.


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 R7 350
Radeon R7 350
Intel Arc A310
Arc A310

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.


3.8 486 votes

Rate Radeon R7 350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 255 votes

Rate Arc A310 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.