Arc A550M vs GeForce RTX 3050 8 GB

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce RTX 3050 8 GB with Arc A550M, including specs and performance data.

RTX 3050 8 GB
2022
8 GB GDDR6, 130 Watt
28.23
+32.7%

RTX 3050 8 GB outperforms Arc A550M by a substantial 33% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking179241
Place by popularity14not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation63.83no data
Power efficiency17.1928.06
ArchitectureAmpere (2020−2024)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameGA106DG2-512
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date4 January 2022 (3 years ago)2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$249 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores25602048
Core clock speed1552 MHz900 MHz
Boost clock speed1777 MHz2050 MHz
Number of transistors12,000 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology8 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate142.2262.4
Floating-point processing power9.098 TFLOPS8.397 TFLOPS
ROPs3264
TMUs80128
Tensor Cores80256
Ray Tracing Cores2016

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).

InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8PCIe 4.0 x16
Length242 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinno 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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth224.0 GB/s224.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR++

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 Connectors1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4aPortable Device Dependent
HDMI+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.66.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.03.0
Vulkan1.31.3
CUDA8.6-
DLSS++

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Dota 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Dota 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 66 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 28.23 21.27
Chip lithography 8 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 60 Watt

RTX 3050 8 GB has a 32.7% higher aggregate performance score.

Arc A550M, on the other hand, has a 33.3% more advanced lithography process, and 116.7% lower power consumption.

The GeForce RTX 3050 8 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc A550M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce RTX 3050 8 GB is a desktop card while Arc A550M is a notebook one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 8 GB
GeForce RTX 3050 8 GB
Intel Arc A550M
Arc A550M

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.9 14106 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3050 8 GB on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 81 vote

Rate Arc A550M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce RTX 3050 8 GB or Arc A550M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.