Arc A750 vs Radeon R7 350

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 350 and Arc A750, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R7 350
2016
2 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
5.58

Arc A750 outperforms R7 350 by a whopping 454% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking597177
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data54.98
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)no data
GPU code nameCape VerdeDG2-512
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date6 July 2016 (8 years ago)12 October 2022 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$289

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores5123584
Core clock speed800 MHz2050 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2400 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate25.60537.6
Floating-point performance0.8192 gflopsno 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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

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 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed4500 MHz16000 MHz
Memory bandwidth72 GB/s512.0 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 DisplayPort1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI++

API compatibility

List of supported graphics 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 HD18−20
−511%
110
+511%
1440p10−12
−550%
65
+550%
4K6−7
−517%
37
+517%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 62
+0%
62
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90
+0%
90
+0%
Battlefield 5 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Hitman 3 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Metro Exodus 144
+0%
144
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 106
+0%
106
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 76
+0%
76
+0%
Battlefield 5 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Hitman 3 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Metro Exodus 143
+0%
143
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 239
+0%
239
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45
+0%
45
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 69
+0%
69
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90
+0%
90
+0%
Hitman 3 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 113
+0%
113
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 199
+0%
199
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 69
+0%
69
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 63
+0%
63
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 38
+0%
38
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 54
+0%
54
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%
Hitman 3 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 92
+0%
92
+0%
Metro Exodus 86
+0%
86
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 145
+0%
145
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 57
+0%
57
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Hitman 3 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Metro Exodus 80
+0%
80
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 69
+0%
69
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 28
+0%
28
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30
+0%
30
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 61
+0%
61
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 84
+0%
84
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30
+0%
30
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

This is how R7 350 and Arc A750 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A750 is 511% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A750 is 550% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A750 is 517% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 66 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.58 30.89
Recency 6 July 2016 12 October 2022
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 225 Watt

R7 350 has 309.1% lower power consumption.

Arc A750, on the other hand, has a 453.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A750 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 A750
Arc A750

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.


3.8 468 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 761 vote

Rate Arc A750 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.