GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile vs Radeon Pro Vega II
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon Pro Vega II with GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile, including specs and performance data.
Pro Vega II outperforms RTX 4050 Mobile by a small 8% 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 | 112 | 137 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 48 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 17.19 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 5.82 | 51.15 |
| Architecture | GCN 5.1 (2018−2022) | Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) |
| GPU code name | Vega 20 | AD107 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 3 June 2019 (5 years ago) | 3 January 2023 (2 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $2,199 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
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 | 4096 | 2560 |
| Core clock speed | 1574 MHz | 1455 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1720 MHz | 1755 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 13,230 million | 18,900 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 475 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 440.3 | 140.4 |
| Floating-point processing power | 14.09 TFLOPS | 8.986 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64 | 48 |
| TMUs | 256 | 80 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 80 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 20 |
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 | no data | large |
| Interface | Apple MPX | PCIe 4.0 x8 |
| Width | Quad-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 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 | HBM2 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 32 GB | 6 GB |
| Memory bus width | 4096 Bit | 96 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 806 MHz | 16000 GB/s |
| Memory bandwidth | 825.3 GB/s | 192.0 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 Connectors | 1x HDMI 2.0b, 4x Thunderbolt | Portable Device Dependent |
| HDMI | + | - |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.7 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.1 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| 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.
- Passmark
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.
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
+4.2%
| 96
−4.2%
|
| 1440p | 50−55
+0%
| 50
+0%
|
| 4K | 30−35
+0%
| 30
+0%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 21.99 | no data |
| 1440p | 43.98 | no data |
| 4K | 73.30 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
- Full HD
Low Preset - Full HD
Medium Preset - Full HD
High Preset - Full HD
Ultra Preset - Full HD
Epic Preset - 1440p
High Preset - 1440p
Ultra Preset - 1440p
Epic Preset - 4K
High Preset - 4K
Ultra Preset - 4K
Epic Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 190−200
+0%
|
190−200
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 103
+0%
|
103
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 92
+0%
|
92
+0%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 166
+0%
|
166
+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 | 115
+0%
|
115
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 74
+0%
|
74
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+0%
|
210−220
+0%
|
| 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%
|
| 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 | 108
+0%
|
108
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 125
+0%
|
125
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 62
+0%
|
62
+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%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+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%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 52
+0%
|
52
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 80
+0%
|
80
+0%
|
| Valorant | 138
+0%
|
138
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
| 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%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 37
+0%
|
37
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 69
+0%
|
69
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 35
+0%
|
35
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 58
+0%
|
58
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 24
+0%
|
24
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 60
+0%
|
60
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 45
+0%
|
45
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 45
+0%
|
45
+0%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+0%
|
210−220
+0%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+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%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 22
+0%
|
22
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
This is how Pro Vega II and RTX 4050 Mobile compete in popular games:
- Pro Vega II is 4% faster in 1080p
- A tie in 1440p
- A tie in 4K
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 66 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 34.90 | 32.31 |
| Recency | 3 June 2019 | 3 January 2023 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 32 GB | 6 GB |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 475 Watt | 50 Watt |
Pro Vega II has a 8% higher aggregate performance score, and a 433.3% higher maximum VRAM amount.
RTX 4050 Mobile, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 850% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon Pro Vega II and GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile.
Be aware that Radeon Pro Vega II is a workstation card while GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
