GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile vs GT 415M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GT 415M and GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
RTX 5050 Mobile outperforms 415M by a whopping 4783% 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 | 1250 | 175 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 83 |
| Power efficiency | 4.45 | 52.12 |
| Architecture | Fermi (2010−2014) | Blackwell 2.0 (2025−2026) |
| GPU code name | GF108 | GB207 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 3 September 2010 (15 years ago) | 24 June 2025 (1 year ago) |
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 | 48 | 2560 |
| Core clock speed | 500 MHz | 1020 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1500 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 585 million | 16,900 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 12 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 4.000 | 120.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.096 TFLOPS | 7.68 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 32 |
| TMUs | 8 | 80 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 80 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 20 |
| L1 Cache | 64 KB | 2.5 MB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 32 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).
| Laptop size | medium sized | medium sized |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |
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 | DDR3 | GDDR7 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 1500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 384.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| 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 | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 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.
3DMark 11 Performance GPU
3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 1−2
−7400%
| 75
+7400%
|
| 1440p | 0−1 | 41 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−7700%
|
75−80
+7700%
|
| Palworld | 4−5
−2125%
|
85−90
+2125%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−7700%
|
75−80
+7700%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−2540%
|
130−140
+2540%
|
| Palworld | 4−5
−2125%
|
85−90
+2125%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−1613%
|
130−140
+1613%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−639%
|
200−210
+639%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 20−22
−1290%
|
270−280
+1290%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−7700%
|
75−80
+7700%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−4483%
|
550−600
+4483%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−2540%
|
130−140
+2540%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 80−85 |
| Palworld | 4−5
−2125%
|
85−90
+2125%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−1613%
|
130−140
+1613%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−1833%
|
110−120
+1833%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−639%
|
200−210
+639%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−7700%
|
75−80
+7700%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−4483%
|
550−600
+4483%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−2540%
|
130−140
+2540%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−1613%
|
130−140
+1613%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−1833%
|
110−120
+1833%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−4721%
|
1350−1400
+4721%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Palworld | 4−5
−2125%
|
85−90
+2125%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−4000%
|
80−85
+4000%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 3−4
−7867%
|
230−240
+7867%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−4186%
|
300−310
+4186%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−4600%
|
90−95
+4600%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−6100%
|
60−65
+6100%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
−8700%
|
85−90
+8700%
|
| Palworld | 1−2
−4900%
|
50−55
+4900%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−373%
|
70−75
+373%
|
| Valorant | 6−7
−3333%
|
200−210
+3333%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−2050%
|
40−45
+2050%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−2000%
|
40−45
+2000%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 190−200
+0%
|
190−200
+0%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 190−200
+0%
|
190−200
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 190−200
+0%
|
190−200
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 137
+0%
|
137
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 95
+0%
|
95
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| Valorant | 230−240
+0%
|
230−240
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 30−33
+0%
|
30−33
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
4K
Epic
| Palworld | 30−33
+0%
|
30−33
+0%
|
This is how GT 415M and RTX 5050 Mobile compete in popular games:
- RTX 5050 Mobile is 7400% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Fortnite, with 1440p resolution and the Epic Preset, the RTX 5050 Mobile is 8700% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RTX 5050 Mobile performs better in 29 tests (51%)
- there's a draw in 28 tests (49%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.69 | 33.69 |
| Recency | 3 September 2010 | 24 June 2025 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 8 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 12 Watt | 50 Watt |
GT 415M has 317% lower power consumption.
RTX 5050 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 4783% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 415M 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.
