Radeon Pro Vega 48 vs R7 350
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R7 350 with Radeon Pro Vega 48, including specs and performance data.
Pro 48 outperforms R7 350 by a whopping 422% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 673 | 241 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 7.22 | no data |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) | GCN 5.0 (2017−2020) |
| GPU code name | Cape Verde | Vega 10 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 6 July 2016 (9 years ago) | 19 March 2019 (7 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 cores | 512 | 3072 |
| Core clock speed | 800 MHz | 1200 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1300 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,500 million | 12,500 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 25.60 | 249.6 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.8192 TFLOPS | 7.987 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 64 |
| TMUs | 32 | 192 |
| L1 Cache | 128 KB | 768 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 4 MB |
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).
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 168 mm | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
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 type | GDDR5 | HBM2 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 2048 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1125 MHz | 786 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 72 GB/s | 402.4 GB/s |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| HDMI | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.1.125 |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 5.16 | 26.95 |
| Recency | 6 July 2016 | 19 March 2019 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 8 GB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
Pro Vega 48 has a 422% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon Pro Vega 48 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 350 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon R7 350 is a desktop graphics card while Radeon Pro Vega 48 is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
