GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile vs RTX A4000 Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared RTX A4000 Mobile with GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile, including specs and performance data.
RTX A4000 Mobile outperforms RTX 3050 6GB Mobile by an impressive 54% 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 | 154 | 262 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 78 |
| Power efficiency | 23.35 | 29.12 |
| Architecture | Ampere (2020−2025) | Ampere (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | GA104 | GN20-P0-R 6 GB |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 12 April 2021 (4 years ago) | 6 January 2023 (2 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 | 5120 | 2560 |
| Core clock speed | 1140 MHz | 1237 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1680 MHz | 1492 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 17,400 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 8 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 115 Watt | 60 Watt (35 - 80 Watt TGP) |
| Texture fill rate | 268.8 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 17.2 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 80 | no data |
| TMUs | 160 | no data |
| Tensor Cores | 160 | no data |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 40 | 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 | large |
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | no 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 type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 6 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 96 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1500 MHz | 12000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 384.0 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| 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 Connectors | Portable Device Dependent | no data |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12_2 |
| Shader Model | 6.8 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | no data |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | - |
| CUDA | 8.6 | - |
| DLSS | + | - |
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 | 100−110
+42.9%
| 70
−42.9%
|
| 1440p | 50−55
+47.1%
| 34
−47.1%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 190−200
+50%
|
130−140
−50%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 80−85
+1.2%
|
81
−1.2%
|
| God of War | 80−85
+68%
|
50−55
−68%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+35.5%
|
90−95
−35.5%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 190−200
+50%
|
130−140
−50%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 80−85
+28.1%
|
64
−28.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 110−120
+34.1%
|
85
−34.1%
|
| Fortnite | 150−160
+35.3%
|
110−120
−35.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 130−140
+48.4%
|
90−95
−48.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 110−120
+51.4%
|
70−75
−51.4%
|
| God of War | 80−85
+68%
|
50−55
−68%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150
+56%
|
90−95
−56%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+30.7%
|
160−170
−30.7%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+35.5%
|
90−95
−35.5%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 190−200
+50%
|
130−140
−50%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+9.4%
|
250−260
−9.4%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 80−85
+78.3%
|
46
−78.3%
|
| Dota 2 | 140−150
+16.5%
|
120−130
−16.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 110−120
+46.2%
|
78
−46.2%
|
| Fortnite | 150−160
+35.3%
|
110−120
−35.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 130−140
+48.4%
|
90−95
−48.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 110−120
+51.4%
|
70−75
−51.4%
|
| God of War | 80−85
+68%
|
50−55
−68%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 120−130
+30.4%
|
92
−30.4%
|
| Metro Exodus | 80−85
+64.7%
|
50−55
−64.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150
+56%
|
90−95
−56%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 120−130
+34.1%
|
91
−34.1%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+30.7%
|
160−170
−30.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+35.5%
|
90−95
−35.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 80−85
+110%
|
39
−110%
|
| Dota 2 | 140−150
+16.5%
|
120−130
−16.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 110−120
+54.1%
|
74
−54.1%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 130−140
+48.4%
|
90−95
−48.4%
|
| God of War | 80−85
+68%
|
50−55
−68%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150
+56%
|
90−95
−56%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 120−130
+144%
|
50
−144%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+30.7%
|
160−170
−30.7%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 150−160
+35.3%
|
110−120
−35.3%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 85−90
+77.6%
|
45−50
−77.6%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 240−250
+49.4%
|
160−170
−49.4%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 70−75
+77.5%
|
40
−77.5%
|
| Metro Exodus | 50−55
+64.5%
|
30−35
−64.5%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Valorant | 240−250
+22.9%
|
200−210
−22.9%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 90−95
+43.1%
|
65−70
−43.1%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45
+73.9%
|
21−24
−73.9%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 85−90
+63.5%
|
52
−63.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 95−100
+65%
|
60−65
−65%
|
| God of War | 45−50
+64.3%
|
27−30
−64.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 65−70
+75.7%
|
37
−75.7%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 90−95
+66.1%
|
55−60
−66.1%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+81.8%
|
21−24
−81.8%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 75−80
+74.4%
|
40−45
−74.4%
|
| Metro Exodus | 30−35
+60%
|
20−22
−60%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 55−60
+60%
|
35−40
−60%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+59.6%
|
130−140
−59.6%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
+55.6%
|
35−40
−55.6%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+81.8%
|
21−24
−81.8%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+80%
|
10−11
−80%
|
| Dota 2 | 100−110
+36.4%
|
75−80
−36.4%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 45−50
+70.4%
|
27−30
−70.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+61%
|
40−45
−61%
|
| God of War | 30−33
+66.7%
|
18−20
−66.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 45−50
+84%
|
24−27
−84%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 45−50
+80%
|
24−27
−80%
|
This is how RTX A4000 Mobile and RTX 3050 6GB Mobile compete in popular games:
- RTX A4000 Mobile is 43% faster in 1080p
- RTX A4000 Mobile is 47% faster in 1440p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX A4000 Mobile is 144% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RTX A4000 Mobile performs better in 64 tests (98%)
- there's a draw in 1 test (2%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 35.21 | 22.91 |
| Recency | 12 April 2021 | 6 January 2023 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 6 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 115 Watt | 60 Watt |
RTX A4000 Mobile has a 53.7% higher aggregate performance score, and a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount.
RTX 3050 6GB Mobile, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 91.7% lower power consumption.
The RTX A4000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile in performance tests.
Be aware that RTX A4000 Mobile is a mobile workstation graphics card while GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
