GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB vs Radeon Graphics 320SP Mobile

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated197
Place by popularitynot in top-10021
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data75.41
Power efficiencyno data27.40
ArchitectureGCN 5.1 (2018−2022)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameRenoirGA107
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date6 January 2020 (4 years ago)2 February 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$179

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 cores3202304
Core clock speed400 MHz1042 MHz
Boost clock speed1400 MHz1470 MHz
Number of transistors9,800 million8,700 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt70 Watt
Texture fill rate28.00105.8
Floating-point processing power0.896 TFLOPS6.774 TFLOPS
ROPs832
TMUs2072
Tensor Coresno data72
Ray Tracing Coresno data18

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).

InterfaceIGPPCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data242 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared6 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared96 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1750 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data168.0 GB/s

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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.7 (6.4)6.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.13.0
Vulkan1.31.3
CUDA-8.6

Pros & cons summary


Recency 6 January 2020 2 February 2024
Chip lithography 7 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 70 Watt

Graphics 320SP Mobile has a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 366.7% lower power consumption.

RTX 3050 6 GB, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years.

We couldn't decide between Radeon Graphics 320SP Mobile and GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB. We've got no test results to judge.


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

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.


AMD Radeon Graphics 320SP Mobile
Radeon Graphics 320SP Mobile
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB
GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Radeon Graphics 320SP Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 918 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.