GeForce RTX 5050 vs Radeon RX Vega 64

Place in the ranking	180	121
Place by popularity	not in top-100	17
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	16.67	97.62
Power efficiency	8.72	24.00
Architecture	GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)	Blackwell 2.0 (2025−2026)
GPU code name	Vega 10	GB207
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	7 August 2017 (9 years ago)	1 July 2025 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$499	$249

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

RTX 5050 has 486% better value for money than RX Vega 64.

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown 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. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	4096	2560
Core clock speed	1247 MHz	2317 MHz
Boost clock speed	1546 MHz	2572 MHz
Number of transistors	12,500 million	16,900 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	295 Watt	130 Watt
Texture fill rate	395.8	205.8
Floating-point processing power	12.66 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	64	32
TMUs	256	80
Tensor Cores	no data	80
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	20
L1 Cache	1 MB	2.5 MB
L2 Cache	4 MB	24 MB

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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 5.0 x8
Length	279 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	2x 8-pin	1x 8-pin

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	8 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	2048 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	945 MHz	2500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	483.8 GB/s	320.0 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-
Resizable BAR	-	+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b
HDMI	+	+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.9
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	3.0
Vulkan	1.1.125	1.4
CUDA	-	12.0
DLSS	-	+

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

RX Vega 64 33.20

RTX 5050 40.25
+21.2%

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.

RX Vega 64 13830
Samples: 3507

RTX 5050 16768
+21.2%

Samples: 2916

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	116	140−150 +20.7%
1440p	77	90−95 +16.9%
4K	51	60−65 +17.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	4.30	1.78 +58.7%
1440p	6.48	2.77 +57.3%
4K	9.78	4.15 +57.6%

RTX 5050 has 59% lower cost per frame in 1080p
RTX 5050 has 57% lower cost per frame in 1440p
RTX 5050 has 58% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart	95−100	120−130 +21.2%
Counter-Strike 2	180−190	220−230 +17%
Cyberpunk 2077	75−80	90−95 +16.9%
Resident Evil 4 Remake	85−90	100−105 +14.9%

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart	95−100	120−130 +21.2%
Battlefield 5	161	190−200 +18%
Counter-Strike 2	180−190	220−230 +17%
Cyberpunk 2077	75−80	90−95 +16.9%
Far Cry 5	110	130−140 +18.2%
Fortnite	150−160	180−190 +20%
Forza Horizon 4	167	200−210 +19.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	130−140	160−170 +18.5%
Valorant	315	350−400 +11.1%

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart	95−100	120−130 +21.2%
Battlefield 5	146	170−180 +16.4%
Counter-Strike 2	180−190	220−230 +17%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	270−280	300−310 +8.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	75−80	90−95 +16.9%
Dota 2	150	180−190 +20%
Far Cry 5	104	120−130 +15.4%
Fortnite	150−160	180−190 +20%
Forza Horizon 4	158	190−200 +20.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	110−120	140−150 +20.7%
Metro Exodus	73	85−90 +16.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	130−140	160−170 +18.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	132	160−170 +21.2%
Valorant	293	350−400 +19.5%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5	139	160−170 +15.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	75−80	90−95 +16.9%
Dota 2	138	160−170 +15.9%
Far Cry 5	98	110−120 +12.2%
Forza Horizon 4	128	150−160 +17.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	130−140	160−170 +18.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	77	90−95 +16.9%
Valorant	140	160−170 +14.3%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite

150−160

180−190
+20%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2	80−85	95−100 +17.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	230−240	280−290 +19.1%
Grand Theft Auto V	65−70	80−85 +17.6%
Metro Exodus	46	55−60 +19.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180	210−220 +20%
Valorant	263	300−310 +14.1%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5	85−90	100−105 +12.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40	40−45 +8.1%
Far Cry 5	81	95−100 +17.3%
Forza Horizon 4	98	110−120 +12.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	60−65	70−75 +14.8%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite

85−90

100−105

+14.9%

4K
High

Atomic Heart	27−30	30−33 +11.1%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40	45−50 +18.4%
Grand Theft Auto V	70−75	80−85 +14.3%
Metro Exodus	46	55−60 +19.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	48	55−60 +14.6%
Valorant	205	240−250 +17.1%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5	59	70−75 +18.6%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40	45−50 +18.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18	18−20 +5.9%
Dota 2	96	110−120 +14.6%
Far Cry 5	44	50−55 +13.6%
Forza Horizon 4	66	80−85 +21.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45	50−55 +19%

4K
Epic

Fortnite

40−45

45−50
+9.8%

This is how RX Vega 64 and RTX 5050 compete in popular games:

RTX 5050 is 21% faster in 1080p
RTX 5050 is 17% faster in 1440p
RTX 5050 is 18% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	33.20	40.25
Recency	7 August 2017	1 July 2025
Chip lithography	14 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	295 Watt	130 Watt

RTX 5050 has a 21% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 64% more advanced lithography process, and 56% lower power consumption.

The GeForce RTX 5050 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 64 in performance tests.

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.

4.2 892 votes

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

3.8 2316 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 5050 on a scale of 1 to 5:

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX Vega 64 or GeForce RTX 5050, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.

GeForce RTX 5050 vs Radeon RX Vega 64

Aggregate performance score

Contents

Primary details

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

Form factor & compatibility

VRAM capacity and type

Connectivity and outputs

API and SDK support

Synthetic benchmarks

Combined synthetic benchmark score

Passmark

Gaming performance

Average FPS across all PC games

Cost per frame, $

FPS performance in popular games

Pros & cons summary

Other comparisons

Community ratings

Comments