GeForce RTX 5050 vs 9800 GX2
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce 9800 GX2 and GeForce RTX 5050, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
RTX 5050 outperforms 9800 GX2 by a whopping 2645% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1042 | 118 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 14 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.03 | 97.73 |
| Power efficiency | 0.58 | 24.02 |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | Blackwell 2.0 (2025−2026) |
| GPU code name | G92 | GB207 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 18 March 2008 (18 years ago) | 24 June 2025 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $599 | $249 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
RTX 5050 has 325667% better value for money than 9800 GX2.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 256 (128 per GPU) ×2 | 2560 |
| Core clock speed | 600 MHz | 2317 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2572 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 754 million | 16,900 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 197 Watt | 130 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 38.40 ×2 | 205.8 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.384 TFLOPS ×2 | 13.17 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 ×2 | 32 |
| TMUs | 64 ×2 | 80 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 80 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 20 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 2.5 MB |
| L2 Cache | 64 KB | 24 MB |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x8 |
| Length | 267 mm | no data |
| Height | 2-slot | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | 1x 8-pin |
| SLI options | + | - |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | GDDR3 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB ×2 | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 512 Bit ×2 | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1000 MHz | 2500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 128 (64 per GPU) ×2 | 320.0 GB/s |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | HDMIDual Link DVI | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b |
| Multi monitor support | + | no data |
| HDMI | + | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| Audio input for HDMI | S/PDIF | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 2.1 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |
| CUDA | + | 12.0 |
| DLSS | - | + |
Synthetic benchmarks
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.47 | 40.35 |
| Recency | 18 March 2008 | 24 June 2025 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 8 GB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 197 Watt | 130 Watt |
RTX 5050 has a 2645% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 17 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 1200% more advanced lithography process, and 52% lower power consumption.
The GeForce RTX 5050 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9800 GX2 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
