AMD Radeon R7 350 versus AMD Radeon R7 250
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R7 350 and AMD Radeon R7 250 pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire, Technologies. Analyse du performance de référence des cartes vidéo: Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R7 350
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 8 mois plus tard
- Environ 14% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 25.6 GTexel / s versus 22.4 GTexel / s
- Environ 33% de pipelines plus haut: 512 versus 384
- Environ 14% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 819.2 gflops versus 716.8 gflops
- Environ 36% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 55 Watt versus 75 Watt
- 3.9x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 4500 MHz versus 1150 MHz
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 7787 versus 7525
- Environ 27% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 25.508 versus 20.161
- 2.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 647.813 versus 304.279
- Environ 64% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.72 versus 1.655
- Environ 48% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 44.6 versus 30.046
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 109.558 versus 96.934
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 6 July 2016 versus 8 October 2013 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 25.6 GTexel / s versus 22.4 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 512 versus 384 |
| Performance á point flottant | 819.2 gflops versus 716.8 gflops |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 55 Watt versus 75 Watt |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4500 MHz versus 1150 MHz |
| Référence | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 7787 versus 7525 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 25.508 versus 20.161 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 647.813 versus 304.279 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.72 versus 1.655 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 44.6 versus 30.046 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 109.558 versus 96.934 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 3356 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 3356 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R7 250
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2179 versus 2072
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3170 versus 3122
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2179 versus 2072
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3170 versus 3122
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2179 versus 2072 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3170 versus 3122 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2179 versus 2072 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3170 versus 3122 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 350
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 250
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Nom | AMD Radeon R7 350 | AMD Radeon R7 250 |
|---|---|---|
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 7787 | 7525 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 25.508 | 20.161 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 647.813 | 304.279 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.72 | 1.655 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 44.6 | 30.046 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 109.558 | 96.934 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2072 | 2179 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3122 | 3170 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3356 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2072 | 2179 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3122 | 3170 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3356 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1051 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 283 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon R7 350 | AMD Radeon R7 250 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Nom de code | Cape Verde | Oland |
| Date de sortie | 6 July 2016 | 8 October 2013 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1083 | 1087 |
| Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
| Conception | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series | |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $89 | |
| Prix maintenant | $78.34 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 27.62 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse du noyau | 800 MHz | |
| Performance á point flottant | 819.2 gflops | 716.8 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 512 | 384 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 25.6 GTexel / s | 22.4 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 55 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,500 million | 1,040 million |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1050 MHz | |
| Stream Processors | 384 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Longeur | 168 mm | 168 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | N / A |
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 72 GB / s | 72 GB/s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4500 MHz | 1150 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | DDR3 / GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| AppAcceleration | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| DDMA audio | ||
| FreeSync | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon R7 350 avec des autres
AMDRadeon R7 350 vs
ATIRadeon 9100
AMDRadeon R7 350 vs
ATIRadeon 9800 XT
AMDRadeon R7 350 vs
AMDFirePro M4150
AMDRadeon R7 350 vs
IntelIris Graphics 6100
AMDRadeon R7 350 vs
NVIDIAQuadro M500M
AMDRadeon R7 350 vs
IntelUHD Graphics P630
