Quadro FX 2500M vs GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile

Place in the ranking	222	1206
Place by popularity	60	not in top-100
Power efficiency	28.35	0.87
Architecture	Ampere (2020−2024)	Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code name	GN20-P0	G71
Market segment	Laptop	Mobile workstation
Release date	11 May 2021 (3 years ago)	29 September 2005 (19 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$99.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	32
Core clock speed	1238 MHz	500 MHz
Boost clock speed	1500 MHz	500 MHz
Number of transistors	no data	278 million
Manufacturing process technology	8 nm	90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	60 Watt (35 - 80 Watt TGP)	45 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	12.00
ROPs	no data	16
TMUs	no data	24

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	MXM-III

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	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	512 MB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	12000 MHz	600 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	38.4 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	12_2	9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model	no data	3.0
OpenGL	no data	2.1
OpenCL	no data	N/A
Vulkan	-	N/A

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	63 +6200%	1−2 −6200%
1440p	43	0−1
4K	28	0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

66
+2100%

3−4

−2100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	55−60 +1275%	4−5 −1275%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	58 +5700%	1−2 −5700%
Battlefield 5	80−85 +8100%	1−2 −8100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 +1600%	3−4 −1600%
Cyberpunk 2077	52 +1633%	3−4 −1633%
Far Cry 5	55−60 +5600%	1−2 −5600%
Far Cry New Dawn	65−70 +6400%	1−2 −6400%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +4733%	3−4 −4733%
Hitman 3	57 +1040%	5−6 −1040%
Horizon Zero Dawn	110−120 +945%	10−12 −945%
Metro Exodus	126 +6200%	2−3 −6200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	87 +8600%	1−2 −8600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	80−85 +1300%	6−7 −1300%
Watch Dogs: Legion	186 +520%	30−33 −520%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	55−60 +1275%	4−5 −1275%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	32	0−1
Battlefield 5	80−85 +8100%	1−2 −8100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 +1600%	3−4 −1600%
Cyberpunk 2077	41 +1267%	3−4 −1267%
Far Cry 5	55−60 +5600%	1−2 −5600%
Far Cry New Dawn	65−70 +6400%	1−2 −6400%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +4733%	3−4 −4733%
Hitman 3	55 +1000%	5−6 −1000%
Horizon Zero Dawn	110−120 +945%	10−12 −945%
Metro Exodus	95 +4650%	2−3 −4650%
Red Dead Redemption 2	63 +6200%	1−2 −6200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	94 +1467%	6−7 −1467%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50−55 +440%	10−11 −440%
Watch Dogs: Legion	180 +500%	30−33 −500%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	55−60 +1275%	4−5 −1275%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	24	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 +1600%	3−4 −1600%
Cyberpunk 2077	34 +1033%	3−4 −1033%
Far Cry 5	55−60 +5600%	1−2 −5600%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +4733%	3−4 −4733%
Hitman 3	51 +920%	5−6 −920%
Horizon Zero Dawn	74 +573%	10−12 −573%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	81 +1250%	6−7 −1250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	46 +360%	10−11 −360%
Watch Dogs: Legion	26 −15.4%	30−33 +15.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

72
+7100%

1−2

−7100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +4600%	1−2 −4600%
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40 +3700%	1−2 −3700%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	22	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	27−30	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	18 +1700%	1−2 −1700%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +2800%	1−2 −2800%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +4667%	3−4 −4667%
Hitman 3	37 +517%	6−7 −517%
Horizon Zero Dawn	59 +1867%	3−4 −1867%
Metro Exodus	52 +5100%	1−2 −5100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	56 +5500%	1−2 −5500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	166 +16500%	1−2 −16500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

53
+1667%

3−4

−1667%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20	0−1
Hitman 3	15	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	120−130 +6300%	2−3 −6300%
Metro Exodus	37	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	29	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 +1400%	1−2 −1400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	6	0−1
Far Cry 5	14−16	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	30−35	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	34	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−12	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

25
+1150%

2−3

−1150%

This is how RTX 3050 4GB Mobile and FX 2500M compete in popular games:

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is 6200% faster in 1080p

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

in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is 16500% faster.
in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the FX 2500M is 15% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is ahead in 34 tests (97%)
FX 2500M is ahead in 1 test (3%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	24.46	0.56
Recency	11 May 2021	29 September 2005
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	512 MB
Chip lithography	8 nm	90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	60 Watt	45 Watt

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile has a 4267.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1025% more advanced lithography process.

FX 2500M, on the other hand, has 33.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 2500M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is a notebook graphics card while Quadro FX 2500M is a mobile workstation one.

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