GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile vs Radeon RX Vega 64 Nano

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated234
Place by popularitynot in top-10045
Power efficiencyno data21.83
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameVega 10GA107
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date1 October 2017 (7 years ago)11 May 2021 (3 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 cores40962048
Core clock speed1156 MHz712 MHz
Boost clock speed1247 MHz1057 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate319.267.65
Floating-point processing powerno data4.329 TFLOPS
ROPs6440
TMUs25664
Tensor Coresno data64
Ray Tracing Coresno data16

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
Length152 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pinno 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 amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width2048 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1600 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth409.6 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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12.012 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.06.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan-1.2
CUDA-8.6

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 October 2017 11 May 2021
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 75 Watt

RX Vega 64 Nano has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

RTX 3050 Mobile, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 75% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 64 Nano and GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 64 Nano is a desktop card while GeForce RTX 3050 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.

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 RX Vega 64 Nano
Radeon RX Vega 64 Nano
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile
GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile

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.


4.8 4 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 4463 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile 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.