AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT vs NVIDIA GeForce MX350 Comparison

The Verdict

The data paints a stark picture: the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT is in a completely different performance class than the NVIDIA GeForce MX350. In the two shared benchmark tests, the RX 7800 XT dominates, leading by 110.5% in Geekbench OpenCL and by a massive 314.7% in Geekbench Vulkan. The MX350, with an average benchmark score of 10883, sits at the 49th percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 7800 XT’s average score of 11627 places it at the 51st percentile, though this gap is modest relative to the head-to-head deltas.

The RX 7800 XT is for anyone building a desktop with serious gaming or compute ambitions. Its benchmark data shows it is roughly on par with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (deltaPct -0.5%), the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M (deltaPct 0.9%), and the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT (deltaPct -1.8%). The MX350, by contrast, is an end-of-life mobile chip that appears in portable devices; its rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro 450 (deltaPct 0.7%) and the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 (deltaPct 1.1%). The verdict is simple: if you need raw performance, the RX 7800 XT wins every measurable contest; if you need a low-power chip for a laptop, the MX350 is the only option here, but its performance ceiling is far lower.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational. The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT uses the Navi 32 chip built on RDNA 3.0 architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It packs 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 81.2M / mm². The NVIDIA GeForce MX350, in contrast, uses the GP107S chip based on the older Pascal architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at Samsung. It has just 3,300 million transistors on a 132 mm² die, with a density of 25.0M / mm². The RX 7800 XT has a massive 3840 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 96 raster output units, plus 60 ray tracing cores. The MX350 has only 640 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores at all.

Memory is another chasm. The RX 7800 XT ships with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The MX350 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus, yielding just 56.06 GB/s. Clock speeds tell a similar story: the RX 7800 XT boosts to 2430 MHz, while the MX350 boosts to 1468 MHz. The compute throughput is lopsided—the RX 7800 XT delivers 37.32 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the MX350 manages only 1.879 TFLOPS. Even the FP16 rates differ starkly: the RX 7800 XT does 37.32 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), whereas the MX350 does 29.36 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio). The RX 7800 XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the MX350 supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 7800 XT is an active product with a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, while the MX350 is end-of-life with a PCIe 3.0 x4 interface.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7800 XT wins in every benchmark category where both were tested. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 18290 versus 8689 for the MX350—a 110.5% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 7800 XT scores 54228 versus 13077, a 314.7% lead. The MX350 wins nowhere in the head-to-head data; the wins tally is 2 for the RX 7800 XT and 0 for the MX350.

Beyond the head-to-head, the RX 7800 XT shows strength across a wider suite of tests. It scores 4157 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 1177 in Passmark G2D, 24176 in Passmark G3D, and 13473 in Passmark GPU Compute. Its lower scores in Passmark DirectX tests (121 in DX10, 249 in DX11, 93 in DX12, 304 in DX9) suggest these are not representative of its full capability, but the average benchmark score of 11627 confirms strong overall performance. The MX350 has no data for those tests, so its use case is limited to the two Geekbench results, which are far below the RX 7800 XT's. If you’re looking at desktop gaming, ray tracing, or compute-heavy workloads, the RX 7800 XT is the clear pick. The MX350, with its 20 W TDP and no power connectors, is suited only for lightweight portable tasks where low power draw is paramount.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT than the NVIDIA GeForce MX350 in OpenCL?

A: The RX 7800 XT scores 18290 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the MX350 scores 8689. This represents a 110.5% performance lead for the AMD card.

Q: Which GPU has more memory and bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA GeForce MX350 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus, providing 56.06 GB/s.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two?

A: The RX 7800 XT is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, while the MX350 is built on a 14 nm process at Samsung. This contributes to the RX 7800 XT's higher transistor density of 81.2M / mm² versus 25.0M / mm².

Q: Does the NVIDIA GeForce MX350 support ray tracing?

A: No. The MX350 has no ray tracing cores (rtCores: null). The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT includes 60 ray tracing cores.

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT has an average benchmark score of 11627, placing it at the 51st percentile of all GPUs. The NVIDIA GeForce MX350 has an average score of 10883, placing it at the 49th percentile.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The RX 7800 XT has a TDP of 263 W and requires a 600 W suggested PSU and two 8-pin power connectors. The MX350 has a TDP of 20 W and requires no power connectors.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two GPUs were tested in Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, and the results are decisive. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT scores 18290, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX350 scores 8689. That is a 110.5% delta, meaning the RX 7800 XT more than doubles the MX350's output. This test typically reflects general compute workloads, including physics and certain rendering tasks, so the advantage is broad.

The Geekbench Vulkan result is even more lopsided. The RX 7800 XT scores 54228, while the MX350 scores 13077. The deltaPct here is 314.7%, meaning the RX 7800 XT is over four times faster. Vulkan is a low-level graphics API, and such a large gap suggests the RX 7800 XT’s architecture handles modern graphics workloads with far greater efficiency. The MX350’s Pascal architecture, despite its 1468 MHz boost clock, simply cannot compete with the RX 7800 XT’s 2430 MHz boost and superior memory subsystem.

Looking at the nearest rivals for context, the RX 7800 XT’s average benchmark score of 11627 is just 0.5% lower than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (avgScore 11680) and 0.9% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M (avgScore 11528). It also trails the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT by 1.8% (avgScore 11842). The MX350’s average score of 10883 is 0.7% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro 450 (avgScore 10804) and 1.1% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 (avgScore 10761), but it is 1.5% lower than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER (avgScore 11047) and 1.7% lower than the AMD Radeon RX 550 (avgScore 11075). These numbers show that the MX350 is competitive with older low-end desktop parts, but the RX 7800 XT is in a different league entirely. The head-to-head deltas—110.5% and 314.7%—are far larger than any gap seen among the nearest rivals, confirming that these two GPUs should not be compared for the same use case.