Radeon 760M vs R7 350

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 350 and Radeon 760M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R7 350
2016
2 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
5.59

760M outperforms R7 350 by a whopping 167% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking603354
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency6.9668.11
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code nameCape VerdePhoenix
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date6 July 2016 (8 years ago)8 January 2024 (less than a year 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 cores512512
Core clock speed800 MHz800 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2599 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 million25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate25.6083.17
Floating-point processing power0.8192 TFLOPS5.323 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs3232
Ray Tracing Coresno data8

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-slotIGP
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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1125 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth72 GB/sno data
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 DisplayPortMotherboard Dependent
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
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 HD10−12
−220%
32
+220%
1440p7−8
−171%
19
+171%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 30
+0%
30
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24
+0%
24
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Hitman 3 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+0%
18
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Hitman 3 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 44
+0%
44
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Hitman 3 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 37
+0%
37
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 23
+0%
23
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

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

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Hitman 3 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Hitman 3 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

This is how R7 350 and Radeon 760M compete in popular games:

  • Radeon 760M is 220% faster in 1080p
  • Radeon 760M is 171% faster in 1440p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.59 14.91
Recency 6 July 2016 8 January 2024
Chip lithography 28 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 15 Watt

Radeon 760M has a 166.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 600% more advanced lithography process, and 266.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 760M 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
AMD Radeon 760M
Radeon 760M

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.


3.8 485 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 192 votes

Rate Radeon 760M 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.