GeForce RTX 5070 Ti vs Radeon R7 350

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 350 and GeForce RTX 5070 Ti, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R7 350
2016
2 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
5.60

RTX 5070 Ti outperforms R7 350 by a whopping 1328% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking61510
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data51.76
Power efficiency6.9818.27
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Blackwell 2.0 (2025)
GPU code nameCape VerdeGB203
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date6 July 2016 (8 years ago)20 February 2025 (recently)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$749

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores5128960
Core clock speed800 MHz2300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2452 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 million45,600 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt300 Watt
Texture fill rate25.60686.6
Floating-point processing power0.8192 TFLOPS43.94 TFLOPS
ROPs16128
TMUs32280
Tensor Coresno data280
Ray Tracing Coresno data70

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 5.0 x16
Length168 mm304 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 16-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 typeGDDR5GDDR7
Maximum RAM amount2 GB16 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1125 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth72 GB/s896.0 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 HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b
HDMI++

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.4
CUDA-10.1
DLSS-+

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Battlefield 5 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Far Cry 5 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Fortnite 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 290−300
+0%
290−300
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 400−450
+0%
400−450
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Battlefield 5 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Far Cry 5 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Fortnite 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 290−300
+0%
290−300
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Metro Exodus 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Valorant 400−450
+0%
400−450
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Far Cry 5 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 290−300
+0%
290−300
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Valorant 400−450
+0%
400−450
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 500−550
+0%
500−550
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Metro Exodus 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 450−500
+0%
450−500
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Far Cry 5 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Metro Exodus 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.60 79.95
Recency 6 July 2016 20 February 2025
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 300 Watt

R7 350 has 445.5% lower power consumption.

RTX 5070 Ti, on the other hand, has a 1327.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 5070 Ti is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 350 in performance tests.

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 RTX 5070 Ti
GeForce RTX 5070 Ti

Other comparisons

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.


3.8 498 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 609 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 5070 Ti on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R7 350 or GeForce RTX 5070 Ti, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.