AMD Radeon R7 350 vs AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile Comparison

The AMD Radeon R7 350 edges out the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile in both recorded benchmarks, but the two GPUs are far closer than their architectural differences suggest. The R7 350 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a 4.8% margin and the Vulkan test with a 1.2% margin, yet the Vega 8 Mobile counters with a significantly higher theoretical FP32 throughput and a newer architecture. The data indicates a narrow overall victory for the discrete R7 350, but the integrated Vega 8 Mobile remains competitive due to its modern feature set and higher raw compute potential.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 350 has an average benchmark score of 7425, while the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile scores 7203. This places the R7 350 in the 40th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the 39th percentile for the Vega 8 Mobile.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the head-to-head tests?

A: The R7 350 wins both head-to-head tests. It leads by 4.8% in Geekbench OpenCL (7792 vs 7435) and by 1.2% in Geekbench Vulkan (7057 vs 6970).

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each GPU, and how do they compare?

A: The R7 350's closest rival is the Intel UHD Graphics 750 with an average score of 7441, which is 0.2% slower. The Vega 8 Mobile's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 with a score of 7222, which is 0.3% slower.

Q: Do both GPUs have the same number of shading units?

A: Yes, both the R7 350 and the Vega 8 Mobile feature 512 shading units and 32 texture mapping units. The key difference is that the R7 350 has 16 ROPs, while the Vega 8 Mobile has only 8.

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 (single-precision) performance rating?

A: The Vega 8 Mobile has a higher FP32 rating at 1,127.4 GFLOPS, compared to 819.2 GFLOPS for the R7 350. This represents a theoretical advantage of over 37% for the integrated part.

Q: What are the DirectX support levels for these two GPUs?

A: The R7 350 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the Vega 8 Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1). The Vega 8 Mobile also supports Vulkan 1.3, whereas the R7 350 supports Vulkan 1.2.170.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial. The R7 350 is built on the older GCN 1.0 architecture using the Cape Verde chip, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. In contrast, the Vega 8 Mobile uses the newer GCN 5.0 architecture with the Raven-M chip, produced on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. This process advantage allows the Vega 8 Mobile to pack 4,940 million transistors into a 210 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 23.5M / mm². The R7 350, by comparison, contains only 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, giving it a density of 12.2M / mm².

The memory subsystems are fundamentally different. The R7 350 is a discrete card with 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 72.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Vega 8 Mobile is an integrated GPU (IGP) that shares system memory, with its bandwidth described as "System Dependent." This means the Vega 8 Mobile's performance is heavily influenced by the host system's memory configuration, while the R7 350 has a fixed and predictable memory bandwidth.

Clock behavior also differs. The R7 350 lists no base or boost clock, only a memory clock of 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective). The Vega 8 Mobile explicitly lists a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1101 MHz. This indicates the integrated part relies on dynamic boosting to reach its performance potential, while the discrete card likely runs at a fixed clock. The Vega 8 Mobile's higher boost clock contributes to its superior texture rate of 35.23 GTexel/s, versus 25.60 GTexel/s for the R7 350. However, the R7 350 achieves a higher pixel rate of 12.80 GPixel/s, compared to 8.808 GPixel/s for the Vega 8 Mobile, due to its doubled ROP count.

Where Each One Wins

The R7 350 wins in raw benchmark scores and in pixel processing. Its 16 ROPs give it a decisive advantage in fill-rate-bound scenarios, as reflected in its 12.80 GPixel/s pixel rate. This makes it better suited for traditional rasterization workloads where pixel output is the bottleneck. The R7 350 also wins on memory bandwidth with a fixed 72.00 GB/s, which is a clear advantage over the system-dependent bandwidth of the Vega 8 Mobile. For users needing a predictable, dedicated memory pool, the R7 350 is the stronger choice.

The Vega 8 Mobile wins on theoretical compute power and architectural modernity. Its FP32 output of 1,127.4 GFLOPS is significantly higher than the R7 350's 819.2 GFLOPS, suggesting superior performance in compute-heavy tasks like physics simulations or certain content creation workloads. It also supports FP16 at 2.255 TFLOPS (2:1), a feature the R7 350 lacks entirely. The Vega 8 Mobile's newer GCN 5.0 architecture brings DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3 support, which may be relevant for newer applications that leverage these features. The Vega 8 Mobile also has a much lower TDP of 25 W, versus 55 W for the R7 350, making it the more efficient option for portable devices.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. The R7 350 uses a 28 nm process from TSMC, while the Vega 8 Mobile uses a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. Transistor counts are vastly different: 1,500 million for the R7 350 versus 4,940 million for the Vega 8 Mobile. Die size also differs, with the R7 350 at 123 mm² and the Vega 8 Mobile at 210 mm². The R7 350 has a dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory configuration, while the Vega 8 Mobile relies on system-shared memory.

The R7 350 has 16 ROPs, double the 8 ROPs on the Vega 8 Mobile. Pixel rates are 12.80 GPixel/s for the R7 350 and 8.808 GPixel/s for the Vega 8 Mobile. Texture rates invert this trend, with the R7 350 at 25.60 GTexel/s and the Vega 8 Mobile at 35.23 GTexel/s. FP32 performance favors the Vega 8 Mobile at 1,127.4 GFLOPS versus 819.2 GFLOPS for the R7 350, and the Vega 8 Mobile adds FP16 support that the R7 350 lacks.

Power and form factor are major differentiators. The R7 350 has a TDP of 55 W and is a single-slot card with a 168 mm (6.6 inches) length, requiring a 250 W suggested PSU. The Vega 8 Mobile has a TDP of 25 W, is an IGP with no slot width, no length, and no suggested PSU. The R7 350 uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface and offers display outputs of 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2. The Vega 8 Mobile uses an IGP bus interface and its display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent." The R7 350 supports Vulkan 1.2.170, while the Vega 8 Mobile supports Vulkan 1.3.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results show a clear but narrow victory for the R7 350. In Geekbench OpenCL, the R7 350 scores 7792 against 7435 for the Vega 8 Mobile, a 4.8% advantage. This is the larger of the two wins and suggests that the R7 350's dedicated memory and higher pixel rate provide a tangible benefit in OpenCL workloads. The R7 350's average benchmark score of 7425 also edges out the Vega 8 Mobile's 7203, reinforcing this overall trend.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the margin shrinks to just 1.2%, with the R7 350 scoring 7057 and the Vega 8 Mobile scoring 6970. This narrower gap is notable because the Vega 8 Mobile's architecture is newer and supports a higher Vulkan version. The data suggests that the Vega 8 Mobile's modern architecture partially compensates for its system-shared memory and lower ROP count in Vulkan-specific tasks. However, it still falls short of the R7 350.

The nearest rival data provides additional context. The R7 350 sits just 0.2% behind the Intel UHD Graphics 750 (7441) and 0.6% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (7472). The Vega 8 Mobile closely trails the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 (7222) by only 0.3%, but leads the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE (7171) by 0.4%. These comparisons show that both GPUs are clustered tightly with mid-range competitors, and the 3% difference in their average scores (7425 vs 7203) represents a modest but consistent performance gap.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the AMD Radeon R7 350 is the faster GPU. It wins both head-to-head tests, has a higher average benchmark score, and is ranked in a higher percentile (40th vs 39th) among all GPUs. Users who prioritize raw benchmark performance and require a dedicated memory buffer with fixed bandwidth should choose the R7 350. Its 4.8% lead in OpenCL is the most significant margin in this comparison, and its 16 ROPs provide a structural advantage for pixel-heavy workloads.

The AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile is the better choice for users who value efficiency and modern features over benchmark scores. Its 25 W TDP is less than half that of the R7 350, making it suitable for portable devices where power consumption is critical. The Vega 8 Mobile's FP32 output is 37.6% higher than the R7 350, and it adds FP16 support, indicating untapped compute potential that the current benchmarks may not fully capture. Its support for Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_1) also makes it more future-proof for software that leverages these newer APIs.

The data does not support a landslide victory for either side. The R7 350 wins on measured performance, but the Vega 8 Mobile counters with superior theoretical compute and architectural maturity. For a user with an existing desktop system that can accommodate a 168 mm single-slot card, the R7 350 is the safer bet for immediate performance. For a user building a compact or mobile system where the GPU must share memory and stay within a 25 W power envelope, the Vega 8 Mobile is the rational choice, accepting a small benchmark deficit in exchange for efficiency and newer feature support.