NVIDIA
GeForce 8300 GS vs GeForce MX350
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
NVIDIA
GeForce MX350
Aggregate performance score
We've compared 8300 GS and GeForce MX350 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗8300 GS outperforms GeForce MX350 by ~16% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+16%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 32Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: GeForce 8300 GS (~28%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider 8300 GS
- Higher catalog performance index
- Higher catalog value index
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.1 · Not supported
Reasons to consider GeForce MX350
- More graphics memory
- Lower stated power consumption
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 6.1 · NVIDIA Image Scaling (NIS)
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
NVIDIAPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3631
100100
10054
456
Graphics card ranking
Positions 245–250of 321
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
GeForce MX350
165 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
36Better
31
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
32Better
29
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
30Better
26
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100
100
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
55Better
43
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
Device class
DirectX
OpenGL
TFLOPSBetter
Power consumptionBetter
Clock speedBetter
Memory type
Power connector
Release date
Architecture
Thickness
Max monitors
Max resolution
Length
Compute API
Launch price—
Shader units / coresBetter
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
VRAMBetter
Memory frequencyBetter
Memory bus
Memory bandwidthBetter
Interface
Power consumptionBetter
Process nodeBetter
Recommended PSU
Die sizeBetter
Memory cacheBetter
Transistor countBetter
USB Type-C
Vulkan
DisplayPort
HDMI
Upscaling
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares 8300 GS and GeForce MX350 across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
8300 GSGeForce MX350
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
171 FPS
155 FPS
1080p Ultra
120 FPS
109 FPS
1440p Ultra
74 FPS
58 FPS
4K Ultra
28 FPS
21 FPS
Counter-Strike 28300 GS171 FPSGeForce MX350155 FPS8300 GS120 FPSGeForce MX350109 FPS8300 GS74 FPSGeForce MX35058 FPS8300 GS28 FPSGeForce MX35021 FPS
Cyberpunk 20778300 GS111 FPSGeForce MX350100 FPS8300 GS95 FPSGeForce MX35086 FPS8300 GS54 FPSGeForce MX35042 FPS8300 GS19 FPSGeForce MX35014 FPS
Forza Horizon 58300 GS139 FPSGeForce MX350126 FPS8300 GS90 FPSGeForce MX35082 FPS8300 GS67 FPSGeForce MX35052 FPS8300 GS41 FPSGeForce MX35031 FPS
Hogwarts Legacy8300 GS90 FPSGeForce MX35082 FPS8300 GS76 FPSGeForce MX35068 FPS8300 GS48 FPSGeForce MX35038 FPS8300 GS19 FPSGeForce MX35014 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100363115%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100283522%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100273834%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 100456173%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1001001000%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 100214267%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100234156%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100273834%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 100184586%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100263838%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX10.012.1
VulkanNot supported1.4
OpenGL3.34.6
UpscalingNot supportedNVIDIA Image Scaling (NIS)
Compute APIOpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.1OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 6.1
Architecture and release
ArchitectureTeslaPascal / Turing / Ampere
Process node80 nm14 nmBetter
Release date20072020
Device classDesktopMobile
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count210 million3300 millionBetter
Die size127 mm²Better132 mm²
Shader units / cores8640Better
Base clock459 MHz747 MHzBetter
Boost clock459 MHz937 MHzBetter
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 2x16PCIe 3.0 x4
LengthVaries by boardOEM dependent
ThicknessSingle-slotOEM dependent
Recommended PSU200 WOEM dependent
Power connectorNoneNone
Display outputs and limits
HDMIBoard dependentOEM dependent
DisplayPortBoard dependentOEM dependent
USB Type-CNoOEM dependent
Max monitors3OEM dependent
Max resolution2560 × 1600OEM dependent
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM128 MB DDR2Better2 GB GDDR5
Memory typeDDR2GDDR5 / GDDR6
Memory bus64 bit64 bit
TFLOPS0.0151.199Better
Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 32
- Specifications
- 0 / 69
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (3)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (3)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: 8300 GS or GeForce MX350?+
8300 GS has the higher overall gaming score, while 8300 GS offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
8300 GS is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
8300 GS is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
8300 GS offers more overall performance, while 8300 GS offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
8300 GS is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
8300 GS is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
8300 GS leads in combined 1440p performance. 8300 GS can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
8300 GS is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
GeForce MX350 is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
GeForce MX350 is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to 8300 GS if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.