AMD Radeon 550X vs AMD Radeon R7 350 Comparison

The Verdict

The database records show a clear, two-to-zero win margin for the AMD Radeon 550X in the head-to-head benchmark comparison. Across the two recorded tests, Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, the Radeon 550X is the faster card, and the magnitude of its advantage is substantial. In OpenCL, the 550X scores 8866 against the R7 350's 7792, a 13.8% lead. In Vulkan, the gap widens dramatically: the 550X posts 8970 while the R7 350 manages 7057, a 27.1% advantage. These are not marginal wins; the data indicates a generational step in compute performance.

For a user choosing between these two end-of-life cards, the decision is straightforward based on raw performance. The Radeon 550X should be the pick for any workload that leverages OpenCL or Vulkan, particularly modern graphics APIs where its 27.1% Vulkan lead is decisive. The R7 350's only advantage, as recorded, is its physical form and interface: it is a single-slot card with a PCIe 3.0 x16 connection, compared to the 550X's dual-slot width and PCIe 3.0 x8. If the system's motherboard or chassis strictly requires a single-slot card or a x16 electrical connection, the R7 350 becomes the practical choice. Otherwise, the benchmark data overwhelmingly favors the 550X. The R7 350's percentile rank of 40 versus the 550X's 45 percentile across all GPUs reinforces this ordering, placing the 550X in a higher performance tier overall.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent two distinct generations of AMD's Graphics Core Next architecture, built on different process nodes and by different foundries. The Radeon 550X uses the Lexa chip, based on GCN 4.0 architecture, and belongs to the Polaris (RX 500X) generation. It is fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The R7 350, conversely, uses the Cape Verde chip, based on the original GCN 1.0 architecture, from the Pirate Islands (R7 300) generation. It is built on a 28 nm process at TSMC.

This process difference is fundamental. The 550X packs 2,200 million transistors into a 103 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 21.4 million transistors per square millimeter. The R7 350 has fewer transistors, 1,500 million, but on a larger 123 mm² die, resulting in a density of only 12.2 million per square millimeter. The newer process node allows the 550X to be more efficient in terms of transistor packing, and it also enables higher clock speeds despite the architectural differences.

The memory subsystems differ in bandwidth, though both use 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. The 550X runs its memory at 1750 MHz, translating to 7 Gbps effective and a bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s. The R7 350's memory operates at 1125 MHz, or 4.5 Gbps effective, yielding 72.00 GB/s. This is a 55.6% bandwidth advantage for the 550X, which directly contributes to its higher fill rates and compute scores.

Compute resources are nominally identical in count: both have 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. However, the 550X's higher clocks and architecture revisions produce significantly higher peak rates. The 550X achieves a pixel rate of 19.49 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 38.98 GTexel/s, while the R7 350 delivers 12.80 GPixel/s and 25.60 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is listed at 1,247.2 GFLOPS for the 550X versus 819.2 GFLOPS for the R7 350, a 52.2% difference. The 550X also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, while the R7 350 has no recorded FP16 capability.

API support also diverges. The 550X supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The R7 350 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The newer Vulkan version and full DirectX 12 feature level on the 550X align with its superior Vulkan benchmark performance. Display outputs are newer on the 550X: it has one DVI, one HDMI 2.0b, and one DisplayPort 1.4a, whereas the R7 350 has one DVI, one HDMI 1.4a, and one DisplayPort 1.2.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two recorded benchmarks, Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, both register wins for the Radeon 550X. The OpenCL test shows a 13.8% delta, with the 550X scoring 8866 against the R7 350's 7792. This is a solid lead, but it is not the largest margin in the comparison. The Vulkan test, however, is a blowout: the 550X scores 8970 versus 7057, a 27.1% advantage. This suggests that the 550X's newer architecture and driver stack handle the modern Vulkan API more efficiently, translating to a much larger performance gap than in the older OpenCL API.

Contextualizing these scores against the nearest rivals in the database provides further interpretation. The 550X's average benchmark score is 8918. Its closest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100, averages 8863, a delta of 0.6% in favor of the 550X. The AMD Radeon R9 M265X is 0.8% behind at 8851. However, the 550X is 1.2% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 (9022) and 1.3% behind the NVIDIA TITAN V CEO Edition (9037). This places the 550X in a narrow performance band, essentially matching a professional workstation card and a mobile gaming GPU, while narrowly trailing two desktop NVIDIA cards.

The R7 350's average score is 7425. Its nearest rival, the Intel UHD Graphics 750, averages 7441, a 0.2% edge for the Intel part. The AMD Radeon HD 8850M is 0.3% ahead at 7447, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is 0.6% ahead at 7472. The Intel Arc A310 is 1.7% ahead at 7550. The R7 350 thus sits at the bottom of its rival cluster, barely behind integrated graphics and only slightly ahead of much older mobile parts. In the head-to-head, the 550X's 13.8% OpenCL lead over the R7 350 is roughly equivalent to the gap between the R7 350 and its own nearest rivals, while the 27.1% Vulkan lead is a much larger chasm.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in Vulkan workloads?

A: The AMD Radeon 550X is significantly faster, scoring 8970 in Geekbench Vulkan compared to the R7 350's 7057, a 27.1% advantage.

Q: Do both cards have the same amount of memory?

A: Yes, both have 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, but the 550X has a higher memory clock (1750 MHz vs 1125 MHz) and thus higher bandwidth (112.0 GB/s vs 72.00 GB/s).

Q: What is the difference in physical size?

A: The R7 350 is a single-slot card with a length of 168 mm (6.6 inches), while the 550X is a dual-slot card with a length of 145 mm (5.7 inches).

Q: Which card has better API support?

A: The 550X supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the R7 350 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Q: How does the 550X compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The 550X is 0.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 (average 8863 vs 8918) and 0.8% ahead of the AMD Radeon R9 M265X (8851), but 1.2% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 (9022) and 1.3% behind the NVIDIA TITAN V CEO Edition (9037).

Q: Is the R7 350 comparable to modern integrated graphics?

A: The data shows the R7 350's average score of 7425 is 0.2% behind the Intel UHD Graphics 750 (7441), making it effectively on par with that integrated solution.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon 550X wins in every recorded benchmark category. In OpenCL, its 13.8% lead is driven by a combination of higher memory bandwidth, faster clocks, and a more modern architecture. In Vulkan, the 27.1% lead is even more pronounced, likely due to the 550X's newer API version (1.3 versus 1.2.170) and the architectural efficiency of GCN 4.0 over GCN 1.0. The 550X also wins on peak compute rates: its 1,247.2 GFLOPS FP32 output is 52.2% higher than the R7 350's 819.2 GFLOPS. Its texture rate of 38.98 GTexel/s beats the R7 350's 25.60 GTexel/s by 52.3%, and its pixel rate of 19.49 GPixel/s beats 12.80 GPixel/s by 52.3%. For any workload that is compute-bound or bandwidth-bound, the 550X is the stronger choice.

The R7 350's wins are not in performance but in physical and interface characteristics. It is a single-slot card, which may fit in tighter chassis or alongside other expansion cards. It uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, offering twice the lane width of the 550X's PCIe 3.0 x8. For systems with limited PCIe lane allocation or older motherboards where x8 might be a bottleneck (though the data does not quantify this), the x16 connection is a structural advantage. The R7 350 is also shorter in terms of power draw, rated at 55 W versus 50 W for the 550X, though both share a 250 W suggested PSU and require no power connectors. Neither card has a recorded launch MSRP, so no price-based purchasing guidance can be derived from the database.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two cards, as recorded in the database:

• Chip: Lexa (550X) vs Cape Verde (R7 350)
• Architecture: GCN 4.0 (550X) vs GCN 1.0 (R7 350)
• Generation: Polaris (RX 500X) for the 550X vs Pirate Islands (R7 300) for the R7 350
• Process Node: 14 nm (550X) vs 28 nm (R7 350)
• Foundry: GlobalFoundries (550X) vs TSMC (R7 350)
• Transistors: 2,200 million (550X) vs 1,500 million (R7 350)
• Die Size: 103 mm² (550X) vs 123 mm² (R7 350)
• Transistor Density: 21.4M / mm² (550X) vs 12.2M / mm² (R7 350)
• Base Clock: 1082 MHz (550X) vs null (R7 350)
• Boost Clock: 1218 MHz (550X) vs null (R7 350)
• Memory Clock: 1750 MHz, 7 Gbps effective (550X) vs 1125 MHz, 4.5 Gbps effective (R7 350)
• Memory Bandwidth: 112.0 GB/s (550X) vs 72.00 GB/s (R7 350)
• Pixel Rate: 19.49 GPixel/s (550X) vs 12.80 GPixel/s (R7 350)
• Texture Rate: 38.98 GTexel/s (550X) vs 25.60 GTexel/s (R7 350)
• FP32 Compute: 1,247.2 GFLOPS (550X) vs 819.2 GFLOPS (R7 350)
• FP16 Compute: 1,247.2 GFLOPS (1:1) (550X) vs null (R7 350)
• TDP: 50 W (550X) vs 55 W (R7 350)
• Slot Width: Dual-slot (550X) vs Single-slot (R7 350)
• Bus Interface: PCIe 3.0 x8 (550X) vs PCIe 3.0 x16 (R7 350)
• Display Outputs: 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a (550X) vs 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2 (R7 350)
• DirectX Support: 12 (12_0) (550X) vs 12 (11_1) (R7 350)
• Vulkan Support: 1.3 (550X) vs 1.2.170 (R7 350)
• Dimensions (Length): 145 mm / 5.7 inches (550X) vs 168 mm / 6.6 inches (R7 350)
• Release Date: 2019-03-26 (550X) vs 2016-07-05 (R7 350)
• Predecessor: Polaris (550X) vs Volcanic Islands (R7 350)
• Successor: Vega (550X) vs Arctic Islands (R7 350)
• Percentile Vs All GPUs: 45 (550X) vs 40 (R7 350)
• Average Benchmark Score: 8918 (550X) vs 7425 (R7 350)