AMD Radeon R7 M350 vs Intel Arc A310 Comparison

The Verdict

The Intel Arc A310 and AMD Radeon R7 M350 occupy very different tiers of the graphics hardware spectrum, and the benchmark data reflects a substantial performance gulf. The Arc A310 delivers an average benchmark score of 7550, placing it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the R7 M350 averages 6327, sitting in the 36th percentile. In direct head-to-head testing, the Arc A310 wins both recorded benchmarks outright, with a 337.8% advantage in Geekbench OpenCL and a 411.6% advantage in Geekbench Vulkan.

The data clearly favors the Intel Arc A310 for any modern workload, from general compute to graphics APIs. Its closest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon R7 250, which scores 7557 (a 0.1% difference), the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 at 7580 (0.4% higher), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 at 7472 (1% lower). This positions the Arc A310 as a competitive entry-level discrete GPU, capable of holding its own against several established mid-range parts from the previous generation.

The AMD Radeon R7 M350, by contrast, sits alongside much older or more limited hardware. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 at 6330 (a 0% difference), the NVIDIA Quadro K620 at 6282 (0.7% lower), and notably the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER and RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102, both scoring 6270 (0.9% lower). The presence of these high-end modern cards in the R7 M350's rival list is an artifact of the database's scoring methodology, but the practical takeaway is that the R7 M350 lands in a performance tier that is far below the Arc A310.

For users deciding between these two, the choice is straightforward: the Intel Arc A310 is the superior performer in every measured category. The R7 M350, with its older architecture and lower scores, only makes sense in legacy systems where compatibility with older driver stacks or specific OEM configurations is a priority, though the database does not provide evidence of such advantages. The Arc A310 is the recommended option for anyone seeking usable performance in modern applications.

Where Each One Wins

The head-to-head benchmark results show a clean sweep for the Intel Arc A310, with two wins and zero for the AMD Radeon R7 M350. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Arc A310 scores 30607 against 6991 for the R7 M350, a 337.8% lead. In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap widens further: 28964 versus 5662, a 411.6% advantage. These are not marginal victories; they reflect a fundamental difference in compute capability and API support.

Looking at the broader benchmark suite available for the Arc A310, it also shows strengths in DirectX workloads. Its Passmark DirectX 9 score of 69, DirectX 10 score of 31, DirectX 11 score of 33, and DirectX 12 score of 29 indicate that while it is not a high-end part, it can handle legacy and modern DirectX titles at playable settings, likely at lower resolutions given its modest pixel rate of 28.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 56.00 GTexel/s. The Passmark G3D score of 5433 and GPU compute score of 2157 further illustrate its versatility for both gaming and compute tasks.

The R7 M350 lacks any recorded DirectX or compute benchmark results in the database, with only Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan scores available. Its OpenCL score of 6991 is less than a quarter of the Arc A310's, and its Vulkan score of 5662 is even lower relative to the Intel part. This suggests the R7 M350 is best suited for very old or lightweight applications, where its lower power draw (though not specified in the database) and compact size might be acceptable trade-offs. However, no performance data supports a scenario where the R7 M350 wins in any workload category.

The Arc A310's advantage is not just in raw scores but also in architectural features. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (version 12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the R7 M350 supports DirectX 12 (version 12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The newer API versions on the Arc A310 open the door to features like ray tracing (it has 6 dedicated RT cores) and mesh shaders, which the R7 M350 cannot access at all.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is stark. The Intel Arc A310 is built on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-128 chip, and belongs to the Alchemist generation (Arc 3). It is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with 7,200 million transistors packed into a die size of 157 mm², yielding a transistor density of 45.9 million per square millimeter. The AMD Radeon R7 M350, in contrast, uses the GCN 3.0 architecture, built around the Meso chip, and is part of the Gem System (R7 M300) generation. It uses a much older 28 nm process, also at TSMC, with 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die, giving a density of just 12.4 million per square millimeter.

The core configurations differ significantly. The Arc A310 features 768 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output pipelines, along with 6 ray tracing cores. The R7 M350 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, with no ray tracing support. This means the Arc A310 has exactly double the shader count and ROPs, and 33% more TMUs, which translates directly into higher pixel and texture fill rates: 28.00 GPixel/s and 56.00 GTexel/s for the Intel part, versus 8.12 GPixel/s and 24.36 GTexel/s for the AMD part. The FP32 compute throughput tells a similar story: 2.688 TFLOPS for the Arc A310 versus 779.5 GFLOPS for the R7 M350. The Arc A310 also supports FP16 at 5.376 TFLOPS via a 2:1 ratio, while the R7 M350 is limited to 779.5 GFLOPS in both FP16 and FP32 (1:1 ratio).

Memory subsystems are equally divergent. The Arc A310 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth at an effective speed of 15.5 Gbps. The R7 M350 also has 4 GB of memory but uses DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, with only 16.00 GB/s of bandwidth at 2 Gbps effective. This is a 775% difference in bandwidth, which severely limits the R7 M350 in any memory-intensive workload, including modern games and compute tasks. The Arc A310's memory clock is 1937 MHz, while the R7 M350 runs at 1000 MHz.

The rest of the specifications reinforce the generational gap. The Arc A310 has a base and boost clock of 1750 MHz, a TDP of 30 W, a single-slot form factor, and requires no power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 200 W. It uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface and offers four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. The R7 M350 has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost of 1015 MHz, a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, and no recorded TDP, slot width, power connector, or display output data. The Arc A310 was released on October 11, 2022, and is now end-of-life, with its predecessor being Xe Graphics and its successor Battlemage. The R7 M350 was released on May 4, 2015, is also end-of-life, and lists Solar System as its predecessor and Polaris Mobile as its successor.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has better overall benchmark performance?

A: The Intel Arc A310 has an average benchmark score of 7550, placing it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD Radeon R7 M350 averages 6327, in the 36th percentile. In direct head-to-head tests, the Arc A310 wins both Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan by margins of 337.8% and 411.6%, respectively.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon R7 M350 support ray tracing?

A: No. The R7 M350 is based on GCN 3.0 architecture and has no ray tracing cores listed in the database. The Intel Arc A310, by contrast, includes 6 dedicated ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which includes ray tracing features.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between these two cards?

A: The Intel Arc A310 offers 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth using 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, while the AMD Radeon R7 M350 provides only 16.00 GB/s using 4 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus. This is a substantial difference that affects performance in memory-heavy tasks.

Q: Which GPU is more power-efficient?

A: The database lists the Intel Arc A310 with a TDP of 30 W, while no TDP is recorded for the R7 M350. The Arc A310 also requires no power connectors and has a suggested PSU of 200 W, indicating a low-power design. Without a TDP for the R7 M350, a direct efficiency comparison cannot be made.

Q: Can the AMD Radeon R7 M350 run modern DirectX 12 games?

A: The R7 M350 supports DirectX 12 (version 12_0), so it can run DirectX 12 titles, but its compute performance is much lower than the Arc A310. The database shows no DirectX benchmark results for the R7 M350, so its real-world gaming capability is not quantified here.

Q: What are the closest rivals to each GPU in the database?

A: The Arc A310's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R7 250 (7557, 0.1% higher), AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (7580, 0.4% higher), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (7472, 1% lower), and AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7447, 1.4% lower). The R7 M350's nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 (6330, 0% difference), NVIDIA Quadro K620 (6282, 0.7% lower), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER (6270, 0.9% lower), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 (6270, 0.9% lower).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is limited to two tests, but both are decisive. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Intel Arc A310 scores 30607, while the AMD Radeon R7 M350 scores 6991. This gives the Arc A310 a 337.8% lead, meaning it delivers more than four times the OpenCL compute performance. OpenCL is a common API for general-purpose GPU compute, including video encoding, physics simulations, and some machine learning tasks, so this gap has practical implications for any non-gaming workload.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the Arc A310 scores 28964 versus 5662 for the R7 M350, a 411.6% advantage. Vulkan is a low-level graphics API used in many modern games and emulators, and the Arc A310's superior score indicates it can handle higher resolutions, more complex scenes, and higher frame rates in Vulkan-based applications. The R7 M350's Vulkan support is also older (version 1.2.170 versus 1.4 on the Arc A310), which may limit compatibility with newer Vulkan extensions.

Beyond these head-to-head results, the Arc A310's other benchmark scores provide additional context. Its Passmark G3D score of 5433 is significantly above the R7 M350's average benchmark score of 6327? No, that is not correct. The Passmark G3D score of 5433 is lower than the R7 M350's average of 6327, but the average includes different benchmarks. To avoid confusion, focus on the recorded head-to-head results: the Arc A310 wins both tests by wide margins.

The Arc A310 also has a Passmark GPU compute score of 2157, which is not compared directly to the R7 M350 in the database, but its OpenCL and Vulkan wins suggest it would dominate in compute-heavy tests. The R7 M350 has no additional benchmark data beyond the two Geekbench tests, so any further comparison is impossible without additional measurements.

For users upgrading from the R7 M350, the Arc A310 represents a massive performance uplift, with over four times the OpenCL score and over five times the Vulkan score. The architectural differences, including a modern 6 nm process, GDDR6 memory, and dedicated ray tracing cores, ensure that the Arc A310 will remain relevant for a longer period. The R7 M350, with its 28 nm process and DDR3 memory, is firmly a product of its era, and the data confirms it is outclassed by the newer Intel part in every measurable way.