AMD Radeon R7 M350 vs AMD Radeon R7 M465 Comparison

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon R7 M350 and AMD Radeon R7 M465 are both built on the GCN 3.0 architecture, manufactured by AMD on TSMC's 28 nm process. Both chips, the Meso in the M350 and the Topaz in the M465, pack 1,550 million transistors onto a 125 mm² die, giving each a transistor density of 12.4M per mm². The core configuration is identical on paper: 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 raster output pipelines. Neither GPU includes ray tracing cores or tensor cores.

The most significant architectural split between the two lies in memory. The M350 pairs a 64-bit memory bus with 4 GB of DDR3 running at 1000 MHz, delivering 2 Gbps effective and a bandwidth of 16.00 GB/s. The M465 uses the same 64-bit bus width but equips 2 GB of GDDR5 at 1125 MHz, reaching 4.5 Gbps effective and 36.00 GB/s. That is a 2.25x advantage in raw memory bandwidth for the M465, a decisive factor in texture-heavy workloads.

Clock behavior also differs. The M350 has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost of 1015 MHz, while the M465 starts lower at 730 MHz but boosts slightly higher to 1024 MHz. The M350's higher base clock gives it a more consistent floor, whereas the M465 relies on boost headroom. Compute rates follow the clocks: the M350 delivers 779.5 GFLOPS FP32 and the same 779.5 GFLOPS FP16 (1:1 ratio), while the M465 edges ahead at 786.4 GFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16. Pixel rate is near identical, 8.120 GPixel/s for the M350 versus 8.192 GPixel/s for the M465, and texture rates are similarly close at 24.36 GTexel/s and 24.58 GTexel/s respectively.

Both cards share the same API support: DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both use a PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface. The M350 was released in 2015, the M465 in 2016, with both now marked end-of-life and both listing Solar System as predecessor and Polaris Mobile as successor.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one direct head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. The M350 scores 6991, while the M465 scores 5841. That gives the M350 a 19.7% lead in this test, a substantial margin. The M350 wins the single recorded comparison, and the win tally stands at 1 for the M350 and 0 for the M465.

Looking at the broader context, the M350's average benchmark score is 6327, placing it in the 36th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 at 6330 (a delta of 0%), the NVIDIA Quadro K620 at 6282 (0.7% faster than the M350), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER and RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102, both at 6270 (0.9% faster). The M350 sits essentially at parity with these cards, within a single percentage point.

The M465's average benchmark score is 5841, placing it in the 33rd percentile. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R5 M435 at 5859 (0.3% ahead of the M465), the Intel UHD Graphics 730 at 5929 (1.5% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti at 5731 (1.9% behind), and the AMD Radeon HD 8730M at 5955 (1.9% ahead). The M465 is clustered tightly with these parts, all within roughly two percentage points.

The gap between the two cards in the head-to-head test is far larger than the gap between each card and its own nearest rivals. The M350's 19.7% advantage over the M465 in OpenCL is not a marginal difference; it is a clear tier separation. The M350 competes with professional workstation cards like the Radeon Pro WX 4100, while the M465 sits alongside entry-level integrated graphics and older discrete parts.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon R7 M350 is the faster GPU. Its 6991 OpenCL score against the M465's 5841 represents a 19.7% lead, and its average score of 6327 versus 5841 confirms the advantage is not a single-test fluke. The M350 also holds a higher percentile ranking, 36th versus 33rd, and its nearest rivals include workstation-class GPUs, whereas the M465's rivals are entry-level parts.

The M465 does have one clear technical advantage: memory bandwidth. Its GDDR5 memory at 36.00 GB/s is more than double the M350's DDR3 at 16.00 GB/s. However, the recorded benchmarks do not show this translating into a performance win. In the only direct comparison, the M465 loses by a wide margin. The M465's higher boost clock of 1024 MHz and marginally higher compute rates (786.4 GFLOPS versus 779.5 GFLOPS) are likewise insufficient to overcome the M350's superior real-world results.

For anyone choosing between these two on the basis of the database, the M350 is the pick for raw compute performance. The M465's higher memory bandwidth might matter in specific scenarios, but the data does not support it as the better overall GPU.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M350 scores 6991, which is 19.7% higher than the AMD Radeon R7 M465's 5841.

Q: Do these GPUs use the same architecture?

A: Yes, both use GCN 3.0 and are built on TSMC's 28 nm process with 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die.

Q: How does memory configuration differ?

A: The M350 has 4 GB of DDR3 at 1000 MHz with 16.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the M465 has 2 GB of GDDR5 at 1125 MHz with 36.00 GB/s bandwidth. Both use a 64-bit bus.

Q: What are the core counts for each GPU?

A: Both have 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. Neither has ray tracing or tensor cores.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The M350 has an average benchmark score of 6327 (36th percentile), while the M465 averages 5841 (33rd percentile).

Q: Which GPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The M465 boosts to 1024 MHz, slightly higher than the M350's 1015 MHz, though the M350 has a much higher base clock at 1000 MHz versus 730 MHz.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R7 M350 wins in raw compute performance. Its OpenCL score of 6991 beats the M465 by 19.7%, and its average score of 6327 places it among rivals like the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 and NVIDIA Quadro K620, all within a single percentage point. The M350's higher base clock of 1000 MHz ensures sustained performance without relying on boost behavior. For general compute workloads, OpenCL acceleration, and any task where raw GFLOPS matter, the M350 is the clear choice from the recorded data.

The AMD Radeon R7 M465 wins in memory bandwidth. Its GDDR5 memory delivers 36.00 GB/s, more than double the M350's 16.00 GB/s, and its 4.5 Gbps effective memory speed outpaces the M350's 2 Gbps. The M465 also holds a slight edge in peak compute rates at 786.4 GFLOPS versus 779.5 GFLOPS, and its boost clock reaches 1024 MHz versus 1015 MHz. In scenarios where bandwidth is the limiting factor rather than compute throughput, the M465's memory subsystem is technically superior, even if the benchmark data does not currently reflect a win.

The M350 also wins on memory capacity, offering 4 GB versus the M465's 2 GB, which matters for workloads that exceed the smaller frame buffer. The M350's release in 2015 also predates the M465's 2016 launch, though both are end-of-life products.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon R7 M350 | AMD Radeon R7 M465 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | Meso | Topaz |

| Generation | Gem System (R7 M300) | Gem System (R7 M400) |

| Base clock | 1000 MHz | 730 MHz |

| Boost clock | 1015 MHz | 1024 MHz |

| Memory clock | 1000 MHz, 2 Gbps effective | 1125 MHz, 4.5 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 4 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |

| Memory bandwidth | 16.00 GB/s | 36.00 GB/s |

| Pixel rate | 8.120 GPixel/s | 8.192 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 24.36 GTexel/s | 24.58 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 779.5 GFLOPS | 786.4 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 779.5 GFLOPS (1:1) | 786.4 GFLOPS (1:1) |

| Release date | 2015-05-04 | 2016-05-14 |

| Percentile vs all GPUs | 36 | 33 |

| Average benchmark score | 6327 | 5841 |

| Geekbench OpenCL | 6991 | 5841 |

Identical specifications between the two include the GCN 3.0 architecture, 28 nm process at TSMC, 1,550 million transistors, 125 mm² die size, 12.4M per mm² transistor density, 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, 8 ROPs, 64-bit memory bus, PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.2.170, and end-of-life production status. Neither GPU has a launch MSRP recorded in the database.