NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 vs NVIDIA GeForce MX350 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a split decision between the NVIDIA GeForce MX350 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 760 takes a commanding lead, scoring 11,299 against the MX350's 8,689, a difference of 23.1 percent. This is a substantial margin and reflects the older card's raw compute advantage in a general-purpose workload. The MX350, however, strikes back in the Vulkan test, posting 13,077 versus the GTX 760's 12,551, a 4.2 percent edge. While the Vulkan win is narrower, it is a clear victory for the newer architecture in a modern graphics API.

Looking at the broader average benchmark scores, the MX350 actually holds a higher average of 10,883 across all recorded tests, compared to the GTX 760's 9,458. This is curious given the OpenCL result, and it suggests that the MX350's strengths are concentrated in specific API workloads. The GTX 760's average is dragged down by its Metal score of 4,524, a test the MX350 does not have recorded. When comparing the two cards directly in the shared tests, the GTX 760 wins one and the MX350 wins one, but the magnitude of the OpenCL loss for the MX350 is far larger than the Vulkan gain.

The percentile rankings reinforce the mixed picture. The MX350 sits at the 49th percentile among all GPUs, while the GTX 760 is at the 46th percentile. These are close positions, but the MX350's slightly higher standing aligns with its higher average score. The nearest rivals for each card also tell a story: the MX350 is within 1.5 percent of the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER and within 1.7 percent of the AMD Radeon RX 550, while the GTX 760 is just 0.2 percent behind the GTX TITAN BLACK and 1.6 percent ahead of the Radeon R7 M380. This places the MX350 in more modern entry-level company, whereas the GTX 760 is grouped with older, higher-end parts.

The Verdict

The data does not crown a single winner. It depends entirely on the workload and the API in question. For users prioritizing OpenCL compute, the GTX 760 is the clear choice, as it outperforms the MX350 by 23.1 percent in that specific benchmark. This is a significant gap, and it suggests the older card retains real muscle for compute-heavy tasks. On the other hand, the MX350 wins in Vulkan by 4.2 percent, which may be more relevant for modern gaming or applications that leverage Vulkan's lower overhead.

The MX350 also has a higher average benchmark score overall, 10,883 versus 9,458, and a higher percentile rank, 49 versus 46. This indicates that, on average, the MX350 is the more balanced performer across the tests in the database. However, the GTX 760's OpenCL dominance cannot be ignored. The choice between these two should be guided by the specific applications the user runs. If OpenCL is the primary workload, the GTX 760 is the data-backed pick. If Vulkan performance or overall average consistency matters more, the MX350 is the better option.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural generations and foundries. The MX350 uses the GP107S chip built on Pascal architecture, fabricated by Samsung on a 14 nm process. The GTX 760 uses the GK104 chip on Kepler architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. This process difference is stark: 14 nm versus 28 nm. The transistor counts are surprisingly close, with the MX350 at 3,300 million and the GTX 760 at 3,540 million, but the die sizes diverge sharply. The MX350's die is 132 mm², while the GTX 760's is 294 mm². This results in a transistor density of 25.0 million per mm² for the MX350 versus 12.0 million per mm² for the GTX 760, a direct reflection of the newer process node.

The compute resources differ as well. The MX350 has 640 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. The GTX 760 has 1,152 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. On paper, the GTX 760 appears far more capable, and this shows in the texture rate: 99.07 GTexel/s for the GTX 760 versus 46.98 GTexel/s for the MX350. The pixel rates are closer, 24.77 GPixel/s versus 23.49 GPixel/s, but the GTX 760 still leads. The FP32 throughput tells a similar story: the GTX 760 delivers 2.378 TFLOPS, while the MX350 delivers 1.879 TFLOPS. The MX350 does support FP16 at 29.36 GFLOPS with a 1:64 ratio, a feature the GTX 760 lacks entirely.

Memory configurations also differ significantly. The MX350 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 56.06 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 760 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 192.3 GB/s. The GTX 760's memory bandwidth is over three times higher, which is a major advantage in bandwidth-sensitive workloads. The MX350 compensates with higher clock speeds: a base of 1354 MHz and boost of 1468 MHz, compared to the GTX 760's 980 MHz base and 1032 MHz boost. Memory clocks also favor the MX350 at 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective) versus 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective). The MX350's power draw is drastically lower at 20 W, while the GTX 760 consumes 170 W and requires a 450 W power supply and two 6-pin connectors. The GTX 760 is a dual-slot card measuring 241 mm (9.5 inches) in length, while the MX350 has no recorded dimensions and is described as portable device dependent.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX350 has a higher average benchmark score of 10,883, compared to the GTX 760's 9,458.

Q: How much faster is the GTX 760 in OpenCL?

A: The GTX 760 scores 11,299 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 23.1 percent higher than the MX350's 8,689.

Q: Does the MX350 win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the MX350 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with 13,077, a 4.2 percent advantage over the GTX 760's 12,551.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth differences?

A: The GTX 760 has 192.3 GB/s of bandwidth on a 256-bit bus, while the MX350 has 56.06 GB/s on a 64-bit bus.

Q: Which card is more power efficient?

A: The MX350 has a TDP of 20 W, while the GTX 760 has a TDP of 170 W and requires a 450 W suggested power supply.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The MX350 is built on a 14 nm Samsung process, while the GTX 760 uses a 28 nm TSMC process.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 760 wins decisively in OpenCL compute tasks. Its 23.1 percent lead in Geekbench OpenCL makes it the obvious pick for users running OpenCL-based applications, such as certain scientific computing, video encoding, or general-purpose GPU workloads. The card's higher texture rate and memory bandwidth also suggest it handles data-heavy operations with greater ease. For users with older software that relies on OpenCL, the GTX 760 is the safer choice.

The MX350 wins in Vulkan, which is increasingly relevant for modern games and graphics applications. A 4.2 percent lead in Vulkan may not be huge, but it indicates better optimization for current API standards. The MX350 also has a higher average benchmark score and a higher percentile rank, so for mixed workloads or general use, it is the more consistent performer. Its lower power draw of 20 W versus 170 W makes it far more suitable for thin-and-light laptops or compact systems, though the GTX 760's dual-slot design and power requirements suggest it was built for desktop towers with ample cooling and power headroom.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every major specification category. The MX350 uses the GP107S chip on a 14 nm Samsung process, while the GTX 760 uses the GK104 chip on a 28 nm TSMC process. Transistor counts are similar, 3,300 million versus 3,540 million, but die size differs greatly, 132 mm² versus 294 mm². The MX350 has 640 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs; the GTX 760 has 1,152 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Clock speeds favor the MX350 with a 1354 MHz base and 1468 MHz boost, versus 980 MHz and 1032 MHz for the GTX 760. Memory is 2 GB GDDR5 on both, but the bus width is 64-bit for the MX350 and 256-bit for the GTX 760, leading to bandwidths of 56.06 GB/s and 192.3 GB/s, respectively. Pixel rate is close, 23.49 GPixel/s versus 24.77 GPixel/s, but texture rate is 46.98 GTexel/s versus 99.07 GTexel/s. FP32 is 1.879 TFLOPS versus 2.378 TFLOPS, and FP16 is only present on the MX350 at 29.36 GFLOPS. The MX350 has a TDP of 20 W and no power connectors, while the GTX 760 has a TDP of 170 W, dual-slot width, two 6-pin connectors, and a 450 W suggested PSU. The MX350 uses a PCIe 3.0 x4 interface, while the GTX 760 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs are portable device dependent for the MX350, while the GTX 760 offers 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2. DirectX support is 12 (12_1) for the MX350 and 12 (11_0) for the GTX 760. Vulkan support is 1.4 for the MX350 and 1.2.175 for the GTX 760. The GTX 760 has a launch MSRP of 249 USD, while the MX350 has no recorded MSRP. Release dates are 2020 for the MX350 and 2013 for the GTX 760.