GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile vs Radeon RX 590

Place in the ranking	229	226
Place by popularity	not in top-100	74
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	25.09	no data
Power efficiency	9.54	27.97
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code name	Polaris 30	GN20-P0
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	15 November 2018 (6 years ago)	11 May 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$279	no data

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 cores	2304	2048
Core clock speed	1469 MHz	1238 MHz
Boost clock speed	1545 MHz	1500 MHz
Number of transistors	5,700 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	175 Watt	60 Watt (35 - 80 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate	222.5	no data
Floating-point processing power	7.119 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	32	no data
TMUs	144	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	no data	large
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	no data
Length	241 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	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	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	2000 MHz	12000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	256.0 GB/s	no data
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 Connectors	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	no data
HDMI	+	-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

FreeSync

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12_2
Shader Model	6.4	no data
OpenGL	4.6	no data
OpenCL	2.0	no data
Vulkan	1.2.131	-

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

RX 590 24.37

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile 24.49
+0.5%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

RX 590 23363
+48.7%

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile 15712

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

RX 590 48454
+12.1%

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile 43216

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

RX 590 16814
+40.7%

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile 11949

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

RX 590 86825
+33.1%

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile 65252

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

RX 590 397712

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile 480364
+20.8%

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	101 +60.3%	63 −60.3%
1440p	58 +28.9%	45 −28.9%
4K	35 +34.6%	26 −34.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	2.76	no data
1440p	4.81	no data
4K	7.97	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

40−45

−65%

66
+65%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	65 +18.2%	55−60 −18.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	86 +48.3%	58 −48.3%
Battlefield 5	136 +65.9%	80−85 −65.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	69 +35.3%	50−55 −35.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −30%	52 +30%
Far Cry 5	90 +57.9%	55−60 −57.9%
Far Cry New Dawn	90 +38.5%	65−70 −38.5%
Forza Horizon 4	274 +89%	140−150 −89%
Hitman 3	45−50 −16.3%	57 +16.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	301 +162%	110−120 −162%
Metro Exodus	124 −1.6%	126 +1.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	91 +4.6%	87 −4.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	140 +66.7%	80−85 −66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	272 +46.2%	186 −46.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	113 +105%	55−60 −105%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	73 +128%	32 −128%
Battlefield 5	122 +48.8%	80−85 −48.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	64 +25.5%	50−55 −25.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −2.5%	41 +2.5%
Far Cry 5	74 +29.8%	55−60 −29.8%
Far Cry New Dawn	71 +9.2%	65−70 −9.2%
Forza Horizon 4	259 +78.6%	140−150 −78.6%
Hitman 3	45−50 −12.2%	55 +12.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn	287 +150%	110−120 −150%
Metro Exodus	97 +2.1%	95 −2.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	74 +17.5%	63 −17.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	114 +21.3%	94 −21.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50−55 −1.9%	50−55 +1.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	261 +45%	180 −45%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	39 −41%	55−60 +41%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	62 +158%	24 −158%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	46 −10.9%	50−55 +10.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 +17.6%	34 −17.6%
Far Cry 5	55 −3.6%	55−60 +3.6%
Forza Horizon 4	91 −59.3%	140−150 +59.3%
Hitman 3	45−50 −4.1%	51 +4.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn	96 +29.7%	74 −29.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	100 +23.5%	81 −23.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	51 +10.9%	46 −10.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35 +34.6%	26 −34.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

−12.5%

72
+12.5%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 −2.2%	45−50 +2.2%
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40 −2.7%	35−40 +2.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27 −4%	24−27 +4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	55 +150%	22 −150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	38 +35.7%	27−30 −35.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −20%	18 +20%
Far Cry 5	27−30 −3.6%	27−30 +3.6%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 −2.9%	140−150 +2.9%
Hitman 3	27−30 −27.6%	37 +27.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	72 +22%	59 −22%
Metro Exodus	58 +11.5%	52 −11.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	70 +25%	56 −25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−33 −3.3%	30−35 +3.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	203 +22.3%	166 −22.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

−23.3%

53
+23.3%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	39 +56%	24−27 −56%
Far Cry New Dawn	26 +36.8%	18−20 −36.8%
Hitman 3	18−20 +26.7%	15 −26.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	57 −125%	120−130 +125%
Metro Exodus	36 −2.8%	37 +2.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	32 +10.3%	29 −10.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	19 +26.7%	14−16 −26.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	42 +223%	12−14 −223%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20 +42.9%	14−16 −42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +0%	6 +0%
Far Cry 5	17 +21.4%	14−16 −21.4%
Forza Horizon 4	46 +35.3%	30−35 −35.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	40 +17.6%	34 −17.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	13 +18.2%	10−12 −18.2%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

30
+20%

−20%

This is how RX 590 and RTX 3050 4GB Mobile compete in popular games:

RX 590 is 60% faster in 1080p
RX 590 is 29% faster in 1440p
RX 590 is 35% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Assassin's Creed Valhalla, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX 590 is 223% faster.
in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is 125% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX 590 is ahead in 47 tests (65%)
RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is ahead in 24 tests (33%)
there's a draw in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	24.37	24.49
Recency	15 November 2018	11 May 2021
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	175 Watt	60 Watt

RX 590 has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile, on the other hand, has a 0.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 50% more advanced lithography process, and 191.7% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon RX 590 and GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile.

Be aware that Radeon RX 590 is a desktop card while GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is a notebook one.

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