GeForce 256 vs RADEON IGP 350M
GeForce 256
Popular choices:
RADEON IGP 350M
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce 256 is positioned at rank 750 and the RADEON IGP 350M is on rank 328, so the RADEON IGP 350M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 256
Performance Per Dollar RADEON IGP 350M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce 256 uses modern memory architecture. The GeForce 256 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The RADEON IGP 350M lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The RADEON IGP 350M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 20% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 256.
| Insight | GeForce 256 | RADEON IGP 350M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-20%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+20%) |
| Longevity | Pascal (2016−2021) (14nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the RADEON IGP 350M remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce 256 and RADEON IGP 350M
GeForce 256
The GeForce 256 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 20 2019. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 937 MHz to 1038 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 10W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5 points.
RADEON IGP 350M
The RADEON IGP 350M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in July 6 2016. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 800 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 55W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce 256 scores 5 versus the RADEON IGP 350M's 6 — the RADEON IGP 350M leads by 20%. The GeForce 256 is built on Pascal while the RADEON IGP 350M uses GCN 1.0, both on 14 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce 256) vs 512 (RADEON IGP 350M). Raw compute: 0.7972 TFLOPS (GeForce 256) vs 0.8192 TFLOPS (RADEON IGP 350M).
| Feature | GeForce 256 | RADEON IGP 350M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 5 | 6+20% |
| Architecture | Pascal | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 512+33% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.7972 TFLOPS | 0.8192 TFLOPS+3% |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 24 | 32+33% |
| L1 Cache | 144 KB+13% | 128 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce 256 | RADEON IGP 350M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (GeForce 256) vs 256 KB (RADEON IGP 350M) — the GeForce 256 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce 256 | RADEON IGP 350M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce 256 draws 10W versus the RADEON IGP 350M's 55W — a 138.5% difference. The GeForce 256 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 256) vs 350W (RADEON IGP 350M). Power connectors: Legacy vs Legacy.
| Feature | GeForce 256 | RADEON IGP 350M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 10W-82% | 55W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | Legacy |
| Length | 165mm | — |
| Height | 100mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 60°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 0.5+400% | 0.1 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce 256 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2016).
| Feature | GeForce 256 | RADEON IGP 350M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $199 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $20 | — |
| Codename | GP108B | Cape Verde |
| Release | February 20 2019 | July 6 2016 |
| Ranking | #643 | #667 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce 256 and RADEON IGP 350M
