GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB vs RTX 2080 Ti
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce RTX 2080 Ti with GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB, including specs and performance data.
RTX 2080 Ti outperforms 1050 Mobile 3 GB by a whopping 350% 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 | 66 | 452 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 17.79 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 15.80 | 11.69 |
| Architecture | Turing (2018−2022) | Pascal (2016−2021) |
| GPU code name | TU102 | GP107 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 20 September 2018 (7 years ago) | 1 February 2019 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $999 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 4352 | 768 |
| Core clock speed | 1350 MHz | 1366 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1545 MHz | 1442 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 18,600 million | 3,300 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 420.2 | 69.22 |
| Floating-point processing power | 13.45 TFLOPS | 2.215 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 88 | 24 |
| TMUs | 272 | 48 |
| Tensor Cores | 544 | no data |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 68 | no data |
| L1 Cache | 4.3 MB | 288 KB |
| L2 Cache | 5.5 MB | 768 KB |
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 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 8-pin | no 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 type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 11 GB | 3 GB |
| Memory bus width | 352 Bit | 96 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz | 1752 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 616.0 GB/s | 84.1 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
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 | 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C | No outputs |
| HDMI | + | - |
| G-SYNC support | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| VR Ready | + | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.8 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.2 |
| CUDA | 7.5 | 6.1 |
| DLSS | + | - |
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 | 165
+371%
| 35−40
−371%
|
| 1440p | 121
+404%
| 24−27
−404%
|
| 4K | 92
+411%
| 18−21
−411%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 6.05 | no data |
| 1440p | 8.26 | no data |
| 4K | 10.86 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 260−270
+389%
|
55−60
−389%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 120−130
+367%
|
27−30
−367%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 120−130
+370%
|
27−30
−370%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 170
+386%
|
35−40
−386%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 260−270
+389%
|
55−60
−389%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 120−130
+367%
|
27−30
−367%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 121
+404%
|
24−27
−404%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 136
+353%
|
30−33
−353%
|
| Fortnite | 302
+365%
|
65−70
−365%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 182
+355%
|
40−45
−355%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 120−130
+370%
|
27−30
−370%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 201
+403%
|
40−45
−403%
|
| Valorant | 285
+375%
|
60−65
−375%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 164
+369%
|
35−40
−369%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 260−270
+389%
|
55−60
−389%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+365%
|
60−65
−365%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 120−130
+367%
|
27−30
−367%
|
| Dota 2 | 146
+387%
|
30−33
−387%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 121
+404%
|
24−27
−404%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 130
+381%
|
27−30
−381%
|
| Fortnite | 232
+364%
|
50−55
−364%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 181
+353%
|
40−45
−353%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 134
+396%
|
27−30
−396%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 120−130
+370%
|
27−30
−370%
|
| Metro Exodus | 107
+410%
|
21−24
−410%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 193
+383%
|
40−45
−383%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 247
+394%
|
50−55
−394%
|
| Valorant | 267
+385%
|
55−60
−385%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 159
+354%
|
35−40
−354%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 120−130
+367%
|
27−30
−367%
|
| Dota 2 | 141
+370%
|
30−33
−370%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 121
+404%
|
24−27
−404%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 122
+352%
|
27−30
−352%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 168
+380%
|
35−40
−380%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 120−130
+370%
|
27−30
−370%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 191
+378%
|
40−45
−378%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 135
+400%
|
27−30
−400%
|
| Valorant | 259
+371%
|
55−60
−371%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 216
+380%
|
45−50
−380%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 140−150
+387%
|
30−33
−387%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 350−400
+371%
|
80−85
−371%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 110−120
+363%
|
24−27
−363%
|
| Metro Exodus | 76
+375%
|
16−18
−375%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+400%
|
35−40
−400%
|
| Valorant | 266
+384%
|
55−60
−384%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 134
+396%
|
27−30
−396%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 65−70
+386%
|
14−16
−386%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 120
+400%
|
24−27
−400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 117
+388%
|
24−27
−388%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 147
+390%
|
30−33
−390%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 60−65
+357%
|
14−16
−357%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 110−120
+363%
|
24−27
−363%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 151
+403%
|
30−33
−403%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 65−70
+364%
|
14−16
−364%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270
+391%
|
55−60
−391%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 142
+373%
|
30−33
−373%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 35−40
+400%
|
7−8
−400%
|
| Metro Exodus | 51
+410%
|
10−11
−410%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 98
+367%
|
21−24
−367%
|
| Valorant | 259
+371%
|
55−60
−371%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 86
+378%
|
18−20
−378%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 65−70
+364%
|
14−16
−364%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+357%
|
7−8
−357%
|
| Dota 2 | 139
+363%
|
30−33
−363%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 73
+356%
|
16−18
−356%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 78
+388%
|
16−18
−388%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 107
+410%
|
21−24
−410%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 35−40
+400%
|
7−8
−400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 88
+389%
|
18−20
−389%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 79
+394%
|
16−18
−394%
|
This is how RTX 2080 Ti and GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB compete in popular games:
- RTX 2080 Ti is 371% faster in 1080p
- RTX 2080 Ti is 404% faster in 1440p
- RTX 2080 Ti is 411% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 51.42 | 11.42 |
| Recency | 20 September 2018 | 1 February 2019 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 11 GB | 3 GB |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | 75 Watt |
RTX 2080 Ti has a 350.3% higher aggregate performance score, a 266.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.
GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 months, and 233.3% lower power consumption.
The GeForce RTX 2080 Ti is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce RTX 2080 Ti is a desktop graphics card while GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
