GeForce 8600M GS vs RTX 3050 4GB Mobile

Place in the ranking	234	1378
Place by popularity	56	not in top-100
Power efficiency	28.12	0.79
Architecture	Ampere (2020−2024)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	GN20-P0	G86
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	11 May 2021 (3 years ago)	1 May 2007 (17 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	2048	16
Core clock speed	1238 MHz	450 MHz
Boost clock speed	1500 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	no data	210 million
Manufacturing process technology	8 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	60 Watt (35 - 80 Watt TGP)	20 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	3.600
Floating-point processing power	no data	0.0288 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	4
TMUs	no data	8

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	medium sized
Interface	no data	MXM-II

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	DDR2
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	512 MB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	12000 MHz	400 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	12.8 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 and SDK compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12_2	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	no data	4.0
OpenGL	no data	3.3
OpenCL	no data	1.1
Vulkan	-	N/A
CUDA	-	1.1

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	64	0−1
1440p	44	-0−1
4K	29	-0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	42 +367%	9−10 −367%
Cyberpunk 2077	66 +3200%	2−3 −3200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	38 +322%	9−10 −322%
Cyberpunk 2077	46 +2200%	2−3 −2200%
Forza Horizon 4	115 +2200%	5−6 −2200%
Forza Horizon 5	80	0−1
Metro Exodus	83	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	87 +2075%	4−5 −2075%
Valorant	133 +13200%	1−2 −13200%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	30 +233%	9−10 −233%
Cyberpunk 2077	37 +1750%	2−3 −1750%
Dota 2	96	0−1
Far Cry 5	73 +943%	7−8 −943%
Fortnite	120−130 +12300%	1−2 −12300%
Forza Horizon 4	94 +1780%	5−6 −1780%
Forza Horizon 5	65−70	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	86	0−1
Metro Exodus	57	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	150−160 +2483%	6−7 −2483%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 +1250%	4−5 −1250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	75−80 +1875%	4−5 −1875%
Valorant	68	0−1
World of Tanks	250−260 +2227%	10−12 −2227%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	45−50 +400%	9−10 −400%
Cyberpunk 2077	31 +1450%	2−3 −1450%
Dota 2	112 +11100%	1−2 −11100%
Far Cry 5	75−80 +971%	7−8 −971%
Forza Horizon 4	81 +1520%	5−6 −1520%
Forza Horizon 5	55	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	150−160 +2483%	6−7 −2483%
Valorant	95−100	0−1

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	48	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	48	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +17400%	1−2 −17400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24	0−1
World of Tanks	160−170 +16200%	1−2 −16200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	17 +467%	3−4 −467%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +1675%	4−5 −1675%
Forza Horizon 4	56	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	35−40	0−1
Metro Exodus	52	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 +800%	4−5 −800%
Valorant	65−70 +1550%	4−5 −1550%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−12	0−1
Dota 2	44 +193%	14−16 −193%
Grand Theft Auto V	44 +193%	14−16 −193%
Metro Exodus	17	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	75−80	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	44 +193%	14−16 −193%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	10−12	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	5 +150%	2−3 −150%
Dota 2	62 +313%	14−16 −313%
Far Cry 5	30−35	0−1
Fortnite	30−33	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	34	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	21−24	0−1
Valorant	30−35	0−1

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

in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is 17400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, RTX 3050 4GB Mobile surpassed 8600M GS in all 29 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	23.55	0.22
Recency	11 May 2021	1 May 2007
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	512 MB
Chip lithography	8 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	60 Watt	20 Watt

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile has a 10604.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 900% more advanced lithography process.

8600M GS, on the other hand, has 200% lower power consumption.

The GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8600M GS in performance tests.

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