GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile vs Quadro FX 3000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 3000 with GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

FX 3000
2003, $203
256 MB DDR
0.16

RTX 4050 Mobile outperforms FX 3000 by a whopping 21225% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1474166
Place by popularitynot in top-10017
Power efficiencyno data52.63
ArchitectureRankine (2003−2005)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameNV35AD107
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date22 July 2003 (22 years ago)3 January 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$203 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

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 coresno data2560
Core clock speed400 MHz1455 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1755 MHz
Number of transistors135 million18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data50 Watt
Texture fill rate3.200140.4
Floating-point processing powerno data8.986 TFLOPS
ROPs448
TMUs880
Tensor Coresno data80
Ray Tracing Coresno data20
L1 Cacheno data2.5 MB
L2 Cacheno data12 MB

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfaceAGP 8xPCIe 4.0 x8
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x Molexno 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 typeDDRGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount256 MB6 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit96 Bit
Memory clock speed425 MHz16000 GB/s
Memory bandwidth27.2 GB/s192.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-
Resizable BAR-+

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK support

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

DirectX9.0a12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.8
OpenGL1.5 (2.1)4.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA-8.9
DLSS-+

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

FX 3000 0.16
RTX 4050 Mobile 34.12
+21225%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

FX 3000 69
Samples: 14
RTX 4050 Mobile 14336
+20677%
Samples: 8691

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-0−194
1440p-0−149
4K-0−130

Cost per frame, $

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 103
+0%
103
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 166
+0%
166
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 82
+0%
82
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Far Cry 5 124
+0%
124
+0%
Fortnite 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 115
+0%
115
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Valorant 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 112
+0%
112
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 69
+0%
69
+0%
Dota 2 169
+0%
169
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Far Cry 5 114
+0%
114
+0%
Fortnite 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 108
+0%
108
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 125
+0%
125
+0%
Metro Exodus 85
+0%
85
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 156
+0%
156
+0%
Valorant 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 65
+0%
65
+0%
Dota 2 162
+0%
162
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Far Cry 5 107
+0%
107
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 80
+0%
80
+0%
Valorant 138
+0%
138
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 79
+0%
79
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 58
+0%
58
+0%
Metro Exodus 50
+0%
50
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 37
+0%
37
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Far Cry 5 69
+0%
69
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 58
+0%
58
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 24
+0%
24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 60
+0%
60
+0%
Metro Exodus 45
+0%
45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45
+0%
45
+0%
Valorant 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+0%
18
+0%
Dota 2 115
+0%
115
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 43
+0%
43
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.16 34.12
Recency 22 July 2003 3 January 2023
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 6 GB
Chip lithography 130 nm 5 nm

RTX 4050 Mobile has a 21225% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 19 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 2500% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 3000 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile 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 Quadro FX 3000
Quadro FX 3000
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile
GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile

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.


3.8 8 votes

Rate Quadro FX 3000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 3947 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 3000 or GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.