CPU
GPU
GRID K2
Popular choices:
GeForce MX350
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 GRID K2 is positioned at rank 381 and the GeForce MX350 is on rank 348, so the GeForce MX350 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GRID K2
Performance Per Dollar GeForce MX350
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 GRID K2 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce MX350 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GRID K2.
| Insight | GRID K2 | GeForce MX350 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.3%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | Pascal (2016−2021) (14nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GRID K2 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $80 versus $200 for the GeForce MX350, it costs 60% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 142% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GRID K2 | GeForce MX350 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+142%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($80) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($200) |
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 GRID K2 and GeForce MX350
GRID K2
The GRID K2 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 11 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 745 MHz. It has 1536 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,737 points. Launch price was $5,199.
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.
Graphics Performance
The GRID K2 scores 2,737 and the GeForce MX350 reaches 2,828 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID K2 is built on Kepler while the GeForce MX350 uses Pascal, both on 28 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 1,536 (GRID K2) vs 640 (GeForce MX350). Raw compute: 2.289 TFLOPS ×2 (GRID K2) vs 1.199 TFLOPS (GeForce MX350).
| Feature | GRID K2 | GeForce MX350 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,737 | 2,828+3% |
| Architecture | Kepler | Pascal |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 1536 ×2+140% | 640 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.289 TFLOPS ×2+91% | 1.199 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 ×2+100% | 16 |
| TMUs | 128 ×2+300% | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 128 KB | 240 KB+88% |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GRID K2 | GeForce MX350 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 2 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | GRID K2 | GeForce MX350 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The GRID K2 draws 225W versus the GeForce MX350's 20W — a 167.3% difference. The GeForce MX350 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID K2) vs 350W (GeForce MX350). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Mobile.
| Feature | GRID K2 | GeForce MX350 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 225W | 20W-91% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Mobile |
| Perf/Watt | 12.2 | 141.4+1059% |
Value Analysis
The GRID K2 launched at $5199 MSRP and currently averages $80, while the GeForce MX350 launched at $250 and now averages $200. The GRID K2 costs 60% less ($120 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 34.2 (GRID K2) vs 14.1 (GeForce MX350) — the GRID K2 offers 142.6% better value. The GeForce MX350 is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2013).
| Feature | GRID K2 | GeForce MX350 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $5199 | $250-95% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $80-60% | $200 |
| Performance per Dollar | 34.2+143% | 14.1 |
| Codename | GK104 | GP107 |
| Release | May 11 2013 | February 10 2020 |
| Ranking | #611 | #597 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GRID K2 and GeForce MX350
