GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile vs 710M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

GeForce 710M
2013
2 GB DDR3, 15 Watt
1.19

RTX 2050 Mobile outperforms 710M by a whopping 1466% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in performance ranking1022279
Place by popularitynot in top-10030
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.26no data
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Ampere (2020−2022)
GPU code nameN14M-GLGN20-S7
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 April 2013 (11 years ago)17 December 2021 (2 years ago)
Current price$44 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores962048
Core clock speed775 MHzno data
Boost clock speed800 MHz1477 MHz
Number of transistors915 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt30-45 Watt
Texture fill rate11.50189.1
Floating-point performance297.6 gflopsno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce 710M and GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizemedium sizedlarge
Bus supportPCI Express 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB4 GB
Standard memory configurationDDR3no data
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1800 MHz14000 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s112.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputs1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort
eDP 1.2 signal supportUp to 2560x1600no data
LVDS signal supportUp to 1920x1200no data
VGA аnalog display supportUp to 2048x1536no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportUp to 2560x1600no data
HDMI++
HDCP content protection+no data
G-SYNC supportno data+
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI+no data
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming+no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Blu-Ray 3D Support+no data
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+no data
Optimus+no data
VR Readyno data+

API compatibility

List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 API12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.6
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.13.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.2
CUDA+8.6

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GeForce 710M 1.19
RTX 2050 Mobile 18.64
+1466%

RTX 2050 Mobile outperforms 710M by 1466% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GeForce 710M 1107
RTX 2050 Mobile 12268
+1009%

RTX 2050 Mobile outperforms 710M by 1009% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GeForce 710M 4641
RTX 2050 Mobile 46821
+909%

RTX 2050 Mobile outperforms 710M by 909% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GeForce 710M 769
RTX 2050 Mobile 8881
+1056%

RTX 2050 Mobile outperforms 710M by 1056% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GeForce 710M 5323
RTX 2050 Mobile 58068
+991%

RTX 2050 Mobile outperforms 710M by 991% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

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 HD2−3
−2050%
43
+2050%
1440p1−2
−2500%
26
+2500%
4K2−3
−1550%
33
+1550%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−1533%
49
+1533%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−1267%
40−45
+1267%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−1300%
42
+1300%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−700%
45−50
+700%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−1120%
60−65
+1120%
Hitman 3 4−5
−1600%
68
+1600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−408%
60−65
+408%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−2450%
50−55
+2450%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
−733%
75
+733%

Full HD
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−1267%
40−45
+1267%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−900%
30
+900%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−1067%
70
+1067%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−1120%
60−65
+1120%
Hitman 3 4−5
−425%
21
+425%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−408%
60−65
+408%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−2450%
50−55
+2450%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
−244%
31
+244%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−1350%
58
+1350%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−1267%
40−45
+1267%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−733%
25
+733%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−700%
45−50
+700%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−1120%
60−65
+1120%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−408%
60−65
+408%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−750%
34
+750%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−2450%
50−55
+2450%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−3500%
35−40
+3500%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−3600%
35−40
+3600%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1000%
10−12
+1000%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−1750%
37
+1750%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−3500%
35−40
+3500%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
−850%
35−40
+850%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−1900%
20−22
+1900%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry 5 6−7
−817%
55
+817%
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2
−2000%
21−24
+2000%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 10−12
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 9−10
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2
−2000%
21−24
+2000%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−700%
16−18
+700%

This is how GeForce 710M and RTX 2050 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 2050 Mobile is 2050% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 2050 Mobile is 2500% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 2050 Mobile is 1550% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Far Cry New Dawn, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 2050 Mobile is 3600% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, RTX 2050 Mobile surpassed GeForce 710M in all 38 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.19 18.64
Recency 1 April 2013 17 December 2021
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 30 Watt

The GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 710M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce 710M
GeForce 710M
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile
GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.2 635 votes

Rate GeForce 710M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 1564 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.