GeForce 315 OEM vs Radeon R7 350

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking601not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency7.07no data
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameCape VerdeGT216
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date6 July 2016 (8 years ago)31 March 2010 (14 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 cores51248
Core clock speed800 MHz475 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 million486 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt33 Watt
Texture fill rate25.607.600
Floating-point processing power0.8192 TFLOPS0.1056 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs3216

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 2.0 x16
Length168 mm168 mm
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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB512 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1125 MHz790 MHz
Memory bandwidth72 GB/s12.64 GB/s

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 DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMI++

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.14.1
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA-1.2

Pros & cons summary


Recency 6 July 2016 31 March 2010
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 33 Watt

R7 350 has an age advantage of 6 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

315 OEM, on the other hand, has 66.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R7 350 and GeForce 315 OEM. 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 R7 350
Radeon R7 350
NVIDIA GeForce 315 OEM
GeForce 315 OEM

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.


3.8 477 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 24 votes

Rate GeForce 315 OEM 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.