GeForce 920MX vs Radeon R7 M350

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.

GeForce 920MX vs Radeon R7 M350 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

GeForce 920MX vs Radeon R7 M350: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

GeForce 920MX

2016

Why buy it

✅34.2% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Draws 16W instead of 35W, a 19W reduction.
✅More future proof: Maxwell (2014−2017) on 28nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌2016 hardware with 512 MB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.

Radeon R7 M350

2015

Why buy it

✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than GeForce 920MX across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌2015 hardware with 512 MB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌118.8% higher power demand at 35W vs 16W.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

GeForce 920MX is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 34.2% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data. PassMark G3D leans toward Radeon R7 M350 instead at 1,066 vs 1,064, so for this question the real-game FPS result matters more than the synthetic split.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

GeForce 920MX is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: a newer 2016 generation instead of 2015. That makes it the less risky pick as game demands keep moving.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

Radeon R7 M350 makes the most sense to buy today. It is priced the same on MSRP at $100 vs $100, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 0.2% (10.7 vs 10.6), which is enough to swing the recommendation its way. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, Radeon R7 M350 is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, GeForce 920MX has the stronger long-term case.

GeForce 920MX vs Radeon R7 M350 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

GeForce 920MX

The GeForce 920MX is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 25 2016. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 965 MHz to 993 MHz. It has 256 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 16W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,064 points.

Radeon R7 M350

The Radeon R7 M350 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 5 2015. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1000 MHz to 825 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 35W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,066 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce 920MX scores 1,064 and the Radeon R7 M350 reaches 1,066 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce 920MX is built on Maxwell while the Radeon R7 M350 uses GCN 3.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 256 (GeForce 920MX) vs 384 (Radeon R7 M350). Raw compute: 0.5084 TFLOPS (GeForce 920MX) vs 0.7795 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 M350). Boost clocks: 993 MHz vs 825 MHz.

Feature	GeForce 920MX	Radeon R7 M350
G3D Mark Score	1,064	1,066
Architecture	Maxwell	GCN 3.0
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	256	384+50%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.5084 TFLOPS	0.7795 TFLOPS+53%
Boost Clock	993 MHz+20%	825 MHz
ROPs	8	8
TMUs	24	24
L1 Cache	128 KB+33%	96 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB+669%	0.13 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce 920MX gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The Radeon R7 M350 leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.

Feature	GeForce 920MX	Radeon R7 M350
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards ship with 512 MB of GDDR5. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce 920MX and 128-bit on the Radeon R7 M350. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce 920MX) vs 0.13 MB (Radeon R7 M350) — the GeForce 920MX has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce 920MX	Radeon R7 M350
VRAM Capacity	0.5 GB	0.5 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	Unknown	Unknown
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB+669%	0.13 MB

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce 920MX draws 16W versus the Radeon R7 M350's 35W — a 74.5% difference. The GeForce 920MX is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 920MX) vs 350W (Radeon R7 M350). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Mobile.

Feature	GeForce 920MX	Radeon R7 M350
TDP	16W-54%	35W
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	Mobile
Perf/Watt	66.5+118%	30.5

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the GeForce 920MX came in at $100, while the Radeon R7 M350 launched at $100. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 10.6 (GeForce 920MX) vs 10.7 (Radeon R7 M350) — the Radeon R7 M350 offers 0.9% better value. The newer card here is GeForce 920MX (2016 vs 2015).

Feature	GeForce 920MX	Radeon R7 M350
MSRP	$100	$100
Performance per Dollar	10.6	10.7
Codename	GM108	Meso
Release	March 25 2016	May 5 2015
Ranking	#864	#862

Search GeForce 920MX on Amazon

Search Radeon R7 M350 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.