Radeon 840M vs GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile and Radeon 840M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
RTX 3050 4GB Mobile outperforms 840M by a whopping 115% 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 | 257 | 451 |
| Place by popularity | 54 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 27.29 | no data |
| Architecture | Ampere (2020−2024) | RDNA 3+ (2024) |
| GPU code name | GN20-P0 | Krackan Point |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 11 May 2021 (3 years ago) | 2 June 2024 (less than a year 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 | 256 |
| Core clock speed | 1238 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 1500 MHz | 2900 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 8 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 60 Watt (35 - 80 Watt TGP) | no data |
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 |
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 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | no data |
| Memory clock speed | 12000 MHz | 7500 MHz |
| Shared memory | - | + |
| Resizable BAR | + | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_2 | no data |
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 | 62
+130%
| 27−30
−130%
|
| 1440p | 43
+139%
| 18−21
−139%
|
| 4K | 26
+117%
| 12−14
−117%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 170
+198%
|
55−60
−198%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 66
+200%
|
21−24
−200%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 54
+184%
|
18−20
−184%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 93
+102%
|
45−50
−102%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 125
+119%
|
55−60
−119%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 52
+136%
|
21−24
−136%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 68
+94.3%
|
35−40
−94.3%
|
| Fortnite | 110−120
+81%
|
60−65
−81%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 90−95
+97.8%
|
45−50
−97.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 87
+164%
|
30−35
−164%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 41
+116%
|
18−20
−116%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 85−90
+132%
|
35−40
−132%
|
| Valorant | 160−170
+63.3%
|
95−100
−63.3%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 89
+93.5%
|
45−50
−93.5%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 36
−58.3%
|
55−60
+58.3%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 250−260
+60.9%
|
150−160
−60.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 41
+86.4%
|
21−24
−86.4%
|
| Dota 2 | 118
+136%
|
50−55
−136%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 64
+82.9%
|
35−40
−82.9%
|
| Fortnite | 110−120
+81%
|
60−65
−81%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 90−95
+97.8%
|
45−50
−97.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 77
+133%
|
30−35
−133%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 86
+115%
|
40−45
−115%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 31
+63.2%
|
18−20
−63.2%
|
| Metro Exodus | 49
+133%
|
21−24
−133%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 85−90
+132%
|
35−40
−132%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 81
+200%
|
27−30
−200%
|
| Valorant | 160−170
+63.3%
|
95−100
−63.3%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 83
+80.4%
|
45−50
−80.4%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 34
+54.5%
|
21−24
−54.5%
|
| Dota 2 | 112
+124%
|
50−55
−124%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 61
+74.3%
|
35−40
−74.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 90−95
+97.8%
|
45−50
−97.8%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 19
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 85−90
+132%
|
35−40
−132%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 46
+70.4%
|
27−30
−70.4%
|
| Valorant | 160−170
+129%
|
70−75
−129%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 110−120
+81%
|
60−65
−81%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
+158%
|
18−20
−158%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 160−170
+101%
|
80−85
−101%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 48
+220%
|
14−16
−220%
|
| Metro Exodus | 29
+142%
|
12−14
−142%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+119%
|
80−85
−119%
|
| Valorant | 190−200
+70.1%
|
110−120
−70.1%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 66
+144%
|
27−30
−144%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18
+100%
|
9−10
−100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 49
+123%
|
21−24
−123%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 55−60
+132%
|
24−27
−132%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 24−27
+127%
|
10−12
−127%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 35−40
+153%
|
14−16
−153%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 50−55
+145%
|
21−24
−145%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+340%
|
5−6
−340%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 44
+100%
|
21−24
−100%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 14−16
+180%
|
5−6
−180%
|
| Metro Exodus | 17
+183%
|
6−7
−183%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 29
+142%
|
12−14
−142%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
+136%
|
55−60
−136%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 35
+169%
|
12−14
−169%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+120%
|
10−11
−120%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
| Dota 2 | 62
+130%
|
27−30
−130%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 19
+72.7%
|
10−12
−72.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+122%
|
18−20
−122%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 14−16
+180%
|
5−6
−180%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 24−27
+140%
|
10−11
−140%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 24−27
+140%
|
10−11
−140%
|
This is how RTX 3050 4GB Mobile and Radeon 840M compete in popular games:
- RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is 130% faster in 1080p
- RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is 139% faster in 1440p
- RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is 117% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is 340% faster.
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Radeon 840M is 58% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is ahead in 58 tests (97%)
- Radeon 840M is ahead in 1 test (2%)
- there's a draw in 1 test (2%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 22.78 | 10.60 |
| Recency | 11 May 2021 | 2 June 2024 |
| Chip lithography | 8 nm | 4 nm |
RTX 3050 4GB Mobile has a 114.9% higher aggregate performance score.
Radeon 840M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 840M 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.
