H3C XG310 vs Radeon R7 350

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking600not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency7.02no data
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Generation 12.1 (2020−2021)
GPU code nameCape VerdeDG1
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date6 July 2016 (8 years ago)11 November 2020 (4 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 MHz1050 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1100 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt300 Watt
Texture fill rate25.6052.80
Floating-point processing power0.8192 TFLOPS1.69 TFLOPS
ROPs1624
TMUs3248

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 3.0 x16
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 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 typeGDDR5LPDDR4X
Maximum RAM amount2 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1125 MHz2133 MHz
Memory bandwidth72 GB/s68.26 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 DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

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

Pros & cons summary


Recency 6 July 2016 11 November 2020
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 300 Watt

R7 350 has 445.5% lower power consumption.

H3C XG310, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R7 350 and H3C XG310. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon R7 350 is a desktop card while H3C XG310 is a workstation one.


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 H3C XG310
H3C XG310

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.


3.8 476 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 7 votes

Rate H3C XG310 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.