GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile vs GTX 280M SLI
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 280M SLI and GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
RTX 3050 Ti Mobile outperforms GTX 280M SLI by a whopping 665% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 733 | 215 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 62 |
| Power efficiency | 1.58 | 24.18 |
| Architecture | G9x (2007−2010) | Ampere (2020−2024) |
| GPU code name | N10E-GTX | GA106 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 2 March 2009 (15 years ago) | 11 May 2021 (3 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 | 256 | 2560 |
| Core clock speed | 585 MHz | 735 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1035 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1508 Million | 13,250 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 82.80 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 5.299 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 48 |
| TMUs | no data | 80 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 80 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 20 |
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 | large |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 4.0 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 | GDDR3 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 950 MHz | 1500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 192.0 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 Connectors | no data | No outputs |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10 | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.6 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.2 |
| CUDA | + | 8.6 |
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 | 9−10
−722%
| 74
+722%
|
| 1440p | 5−6
−740%
| 42
+740%
|
| 4K | 3−4
−833%
| 28
+833%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
−444%
|
45−50
+444%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
−675%
|
62
+675%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 9−10
−789%
|
80−85
+789%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
−444%
|
45−50
+444%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
−525%
|
50
+525%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
−700%
|
128
+700%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
−2075%
|
87
+2075%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7−8
−1100%
|
84
+1100%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 12−14
−717%
|
98
+717%
|
| Valorant | 6−7
−1917%
|
121
+1917%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 9−10
−789%
|
80−85
+789%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
−444%
|
45−50
+444%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
−400%
|
40
+400%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−920%
|
102
+920%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20
−295%
|
75
+295%
|
| Fortnite | 18−20
−584%
|
130−140
+584%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
−556%
|
105
+556%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
−1350%
|
58
+1350%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 10−11
−840%
|
94
+840%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7−8
−786%
|
62
+786%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
−423%
|
160−170
+423%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 12−14
−225%
|
39
+225%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
−617%
|
85−90
+617%
|
| Valorant | 6−7
−1217%
|
79
+1217%
|
| World of Tanks | 60−65
−338%
|
260−270
+338%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 9−10
−789%
|
80−85
+789%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
−444%
|
45−50
+444%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
−338%
|
35
+338%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−1030%
|
113
+1030%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20
−316%
|
75−80
+316%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
−463%
|
90
+463%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
−1325%
|
57
+1325%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
−423%
|
160−170
+423%
|
| Valorant | 6−7
−1767%
|
112
+1767%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 2−3
−1950%
|
41
+1950%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3
−1950%
|
41
+1950%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24
−661%
|
170−180
+661%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 2−3
−1100%
|
24−27
+1100%
|
| World of Tanks | 24−27
−621%
|
170−180
+621%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
−1225%
|
50−55
+1225%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−425%
|
21
+425%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9
−875%
|
75−80
+875%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−1933%
|
61
+1933%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
−950%
|
40−45
+950%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−567%
|
40−45
+567%
|
| Valorant | 10−12
−636%
|
81
+636%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−83.3%
|
10−12
+83.3%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−175%
|
44
+175%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
−175%
|
44
+175%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−710%
|
80−85
+710%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 2−3
−750%
|
16−18
+750%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
−175%
|
44
+175%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 3−4
−833%
|
27−30
+833%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−83.3%
|
10−12
+83.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−400%
|
10
+400%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−238%
|
54
+238%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−1067%
|
35−40
+1067%
|
| Fortnite | 2−3
−1550%
|
30−35
+1550%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−1600%
|
34
+1600%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−2100%
|
21−24
+2100%
|
| Valorant | 3−4
−1067%
|
35−40
+1067%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Metro Exodus | 60
+0%
|
60
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Metro Exodus | 21
+0%
|
21
+0%
|
This is how GTX 280M SLI and RTX 3050 Ti Mobile compete in popular games:
- RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is 722% faster in 1080p
- RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is 740% faster in 1440p
- RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is 833% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Forza Horizon 5, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is 2100% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is ahead in 61 test (97%)
- there's a draw in 2 tests (3%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.40 | 26.01 |
| Recency | 2 March 2009 | 11 May 2021 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 75 Watt |
RTX 3050 Ti Mobile has a 665% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 587.5% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.
The GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 280M SLI in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
