Radeon RX Vega M GL vs GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile and Radeon RX Vega M GL, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
GTX 1050 Ti Mobile outperforms RX Vega M GL by an impressive 50% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 358 | 452 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 13.94 | 10.69 |
| Architecture | Pascal (2016−2021) | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) |
| GPU code name | GP107 | Polaris 22 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 3 January 2017 (8 years ago) | 1 February 2018 (7 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 768 | 1280 |
| Core clock speed | 1493 MHz | 931 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1620 MHz | 1011 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,300 million | 5,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | 65 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 97 °C | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 77.76 | 80.88 |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.488 TFLOPS | 2.588 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 48 | 80 |
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 | large | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | IGP |
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 | GDDR5 | HBM2 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 1024 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 7 GB/s | 700 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 112 GB/s | 179.2 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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
| G-SYNC support | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Ansel | + | - |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | + | - |
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 | 56
+60%
| 35−40
−60%
|
| 1440p | 25
+56.3%
| 16−18
−56.3%
|
| 4K | 17
+70%
| 10−12
−70%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 59
+68.6%
|
35−40
−68.6%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 47
+56.7%
|
30−33
−56.7%
|
| Fortnite | 80−85
+42.1%
|
55−60
−42.1%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 62
+55%
|
40−45
−55%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 56
+64.7%
|
30−35
−64.7%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 49
+63.3%
|
30−33
−63.3%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 124
−16.1%
|
140−150
+16.1%
|
| Dota 2 | 92
+33.3%
|
65−70
−33.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 44
+63%
|
27−30
−63%
|
| Fortnite | 76
+33.3%
|
55−60
−33.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 57
+62.9%
|
35−40
−62.9%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 55
+52.8%
|
35−40
−52.8%
|
| Metro Exodus | 19
+58.3%
|
12−14
−58.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 52
+52.9%
|
30−35
−52.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 47
+88%
|
24−27
−88%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 42
+55.6%
|
27−30
−55.6%
|
| Dota 2 | 86
+24.6%
|
65−70
−24.6%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 40
+66.7%
|
24−27
−66.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 43
+59.3%
|
27−30
−59.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 39
+14.7%
|
30−35
−14.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 26
+4%
|
24−27
−4%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 54
−5.6%
|
55−60
+5.6%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 100−110
+51.4%
|
70−75
−51.4%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 21−24
+64.3%
|
14−16
−64.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12
+71.4%
|
7−8
−71.4%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 29
+61.1%
|
18−20
−61.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 26
+62.5%
|
16−18
−62.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+66.7%
|
21−24
−66.7%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 32
+52.4%
|
21−24
−52.4%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 24−27
+30%
|
20−22
−30%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7
+75%
|
4−5
−75%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 17
+54.5%
|
10−12
−54.5%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 20−22
+66.7%
|
12−14
−66.7%
|
| Dota 2 | 50−55
+45.7%
|
35−40
−45.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12
+71.4%
|
7−8
−71.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 24−27
+56.3%
|
16−18
−56.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+55.6%
|
9−10
−55.6%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 9
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
This is how GTX 1050 Ti Mobile and RX Vega M GL compete in popular games:
- GTX 1050 Ti Mobile is 60% faster in 1080p
- GTX 1050 Ti Mobile is 56% faster in 1440p
- GTX 1050 Ti Mobile is 70% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1050 Ti Mobile is 88% faster.
- in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RX Vega M GL is 16% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- GTX 1050 Ti Mobile is ahead in 14 tests (82%)
- RX Vega M GL is ahead in 2 tests (12%)
- there's a draw in 1 test (6%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 15.07 | 10.02 |
| Recency | 3 January 2017 | 1 February 2018 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | 65 Watt |
GTX 1050 Ti Mobile has a 50.4% higher aggregate performance score.
RX Vega M GL, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 15.4% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega M GL 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.
