GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile vs Radeon Vega 8 Embedded

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated209
Place by popularitynot in top-10054
Power efficiencyno data24.03
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameRavenGA106
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date19 April 2018 (6 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 cores5122560
Core clock speed300 MHz735 MHz
Boost clock speed1101 MHz1035 MHz
Number of transistors4,940 million13,250 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate35.2382.80
Floating-point processing power1.127 TFLOPS5.299 TFLOPS
ROPs848
TMUs3280
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
InterfaceIGPPCIe 4.0 x16
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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared4 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data192.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.2
CUDA-8.6

Pros & cons summary


Recency 19 April 2018 11 May 2021
Chip lithography 14 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 75 Watt

Vega 8 Embedded has 114.3% lower power consumption.

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

We couldn't decide between Radeon Vega 8 Embedded and GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon Vega 8 Embedded is a desktop card while GeForce RTX 3050 Ti 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 Vega 8 Embedded
Radeon Vega 8 Embedded
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile
GeForce RTX 3050 Ti 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.


3.1 116 votes

Rate Radeon Vega 8 Embedded on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 4214 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3050 Ti 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.