GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile vs Radeon Pro Vega 64

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro Vega 64 with GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

Pro Vega 64
2017
16 GB HBM2, 250 Watt
33.61

RTX 4050 Mobile outperforms Pro Vega 64 by a moderate 12% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking166130
Place by popularitynot in top-10046
Power efficiency9.2251.50
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameVega 10AD107
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date27 June 2017 (7 years ago)3 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 cores40962560
Core clock speed1250 MHz1455 MHz
Boost clock speed1350 MHz1755 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate345.6140.4
Floating-point processing power11.06 TFLOPS8.986 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs25680
Tensor Coresno data80
Ray Tracing Coresno data20

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
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length267 mmno data
WidthIGPno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeHBM2GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount16 GB6 GB
Memory bus width2048 Bit96 Bit
Memory clock speed786 MHz16000 GB/s
Memory bandwidth402.4 GB/s192.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 outputsPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.1.1251.3
CUDA-8.9
DLSS-+

Synthetic benchmark performance

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.

Pro Vega 64 33.61
RTX 4050 Mobile 37.56
+11.8%

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.

Pro Vega 64 12920
RTX 4050 Mobile 14437
+11.7%

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 HD85−90
−11.8%
95
+11.8%
1440p40−45
−15%
46
+15%
4K27−30
−14.8%
31
+14.8%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 132
+0%
132
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 79
+0%
79
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 103
+0%
103
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 124
+0%
124
+0%
Battlefield 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 67
+0%
67
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 82
+0%
82
+0%
Far Cry 5 125
+0%
125
+0%
Fortnite 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 102
+0%
102
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Valorant 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 72
+0%
72
+0%
Battlefield 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 59
+0%
59
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 69
+0%
69
+0%
Dota 2 169
+0%
169
+0%
Far Cry 5 118
+0%
118
+0%
Fortnite 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+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 Preset

Battlefield 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 43
+0%
43
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 65
+0%
65
+0%
Dota 2 162
+0%
162
+0%
Far Cry 5 109
+0%
109
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 80
+0%
80
+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 Preset

Fortnite 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 230−240
+0%
230−240
+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 Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 25
+0%
25
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 37
+0%
37
+0%
Far Cry 5 69
+0%
69
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 59
+0%
59
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8
+0%
8
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 64
+0%
64
+0%
Metro Exodus 45
+0%
45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 47
+0%
47
+0%
Valorant 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+0%
18
+0%
Dota 2 115
+0%
115
+0%
Far Cry 5 43
+0%
43
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

This is how Pro Vega 64 and RTX 4050 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 4050 Mobile is 12% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 4050 Mobile is 15% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 4050 Mobile is 15% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 67 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.61 37.56
Recency 27 June 2017 3 January 2023
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 50 Watt

Pro Vega 64 has a 166.7% higher maximum VRAM amount.

RTX 4050 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 11.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 250% more advanced lithography process, and 400% lower power consumption.

The GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro Vega 64 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro Vega 64 is a workstation 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.


AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64
Radeon Pro Vega 64
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile
GeForce RTX 4050

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.


4 21 vote

Rate Radeon Pro Vega 64 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 3034 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Pro Vega 64 or GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.