GeForce MX350 vs Radeon R7 260
GeForce MX350
Popular choices:
Radeon R7 260
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. The GeForce MX350 is positioned at rank #348 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce MX350
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce MX350 is significantly newer (2020 vs 2013). The GeForce MX350 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Radeon R7 260 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R7 260 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.3% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GeForce MX350 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GeForce MX350 | Radeon R7 260 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.3%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.3%) |
| Longevity | Pascal (2016−2021) (14nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R7 260 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $110 versus $200 for the GeForce MX350, it costs 45% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 85.9% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce MX350 | Radeon R7 260 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+85.9%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($200) | ✅More affordable ($110) |
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 MX350 and Radeon R7 260
GeForce MX350
The GeForce MX350 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 10 2020. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 747 MHz to 937 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 20W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,828 points.
Radeon R7 260
The Radeon R7 260 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in December 17 2013. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1100 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 95W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,892 points. Launch price was $109.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce MX350 scores 2,828 and the Radeon R7 260 reaches 2,892 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce MX350 is built on Pascal while the Radeon R7 260 uses GCN 2.0, both on 14 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 640 (GeForce MX350) vs 768 (Radeon R7 260). Raw compute: 1.199 TFLOPS (GeForce MX350) vs 1.536 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 260). Boost clocks: 937 MHz vs 1100 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce MX350 | Radeon R7 260 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,828 | 2,892+2% |
| Architecture | Pascal | GCN 2.0 |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 640 | 768+20% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.199 TFLOPS | 1.536 TFLOPS+28% |
| Boost Clock | 937 MHz | 1100 MHz+17% |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 32 | 48+50% |
| L1 Cache | 240 KB+25% | 192 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce MX350 | Radeon R7 260 |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
The GeForce MX350 comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R7 260 has 1 GB. The GeForce MX350 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 56 GB/s (GeForce MX350) vs 96 GB/s (Radeon R7 260) — a 71.4% advantage for the Radeon R7 260. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (GeForce MX350) vs 256 KB (Radeon R7 260) — the GeForce MX350 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce MX350 | Radeon R7 260 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB+100% | 1 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 56 GB/s | 96 GB/s+71% |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce MX350 draws 20W versus the Radeon R7 260's 95W — a 130.4% difference. The GeForce MX350 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce MX350) vs 400W (Radeon R7 260). Power connectors: Mobile vs 1x 6-pin.
| Feature | GeForce MX350 | Radeon R7 260 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 20W-79% | 95W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-13% | 400W |
| Power Connector | Mobile | 1x 6-pin |
| Length | — | 170mm |
| Height | — | 112mm |
| Slots | — | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 80 |
| Perf/Watt | 141.4+365% | 30.4 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce MX350 launched at $250 MSRP and currently averages $200, while the Radeon R7 260 launched at $109 and now averages $110. The Radeon R7 260 costs 45% less ($90 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 14.1 (GeForce MX350) vs 26.3 (Radeon R7 260) — the Radeon R7 260 offers 86.5% better value. The GeForce MX350 is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2013).
| Feature | GeForce MX350 | Radeon R7 260 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $250 | $109-56% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $200 | $110-45% |
| Performance per Dollar | 14.1 | 26.3+87% |
| Codename | GP107 | Bonaire |
| Release | February 10 2020 | December 17 2013 |
| Ranking | #597 | #591 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce MX350 and Radeon R7 260
