GeForce RTX 3050 8 GB vs Titan X Pascal

Place in performance ranking	147	158
Place by popularity	not in top-100	12
Value for money	15.06	24.28
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Ampere (2020−2022)
GPU code name	GP102	GA106
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	25 July 2016 (7 years ago)	4 January 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$1,199	$249
Current price	$312 (0.3x MSRP)	$385 (1.5x MSRP)

Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 3050 8 GB has 61% better value for money than Titan X Pascal.

Technical specs

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	3584	2560
Core clock speed	1418 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1531 MHz	1777 MHz
Number of transistors	11,800 million	12,000 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	130 Watt
Texture fill rate	342.9	142.2
Floating-point performance	10,974 gflops	no data

Size and 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 4.0 x8
Length	267 mm	242 mm
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin	1x 8-pin

Memory

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	GDDR5X	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	12 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	10000 MHz	14 GB/s
Memory bandwidth	480.4 GB/s	224.0 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no data

Video outputs and ports

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 DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI	+	+
G-SYNC support	+	no data

API support

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.6
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	+	1.3
CUDA	+	8.6

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

Titan X Pascal 33.64
+3.3%

RTX 3050 8 GB 32.57

Titan X Pascal outperforms GeForce RTX 3050 8 GB by 3% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

Titan X Pascal 13026
+3.3%

RTX 3050 8 GB 12612

Titan X Pascal outperforms GeForce RTX 3050 8 GB by 3% in Passmark.

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	126 +5%	120−130 −5%
1440p	76 +8.6%	70−75 −8.6%
4K	59 +7.3%	55−60 −7.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

79
+5.3%

75−80

−5.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	104 +4%	100−105 −4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	95 +5.6%	90−95 −5.6%
Battlefield 5	153 +9.3%	140−150 −9.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	155 +3.3%	150−160 −3.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	78 +4%	75−80 −4%
Far Cry 5	162 +8%	150−160 −8%
Far Cry New Dawn	150 +7.1%	140−150 −7.1%
Forza Horizon 4	127 +5.8%	120−130 −5.8%
Hitman 3	163 +8.7%	150−160 −8.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	107 +7%	100−105 −7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	104 +4%	100−105 −4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	136 +4.6%	130−140 −4.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	104 +4%	100−105 −4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	87 +8.8%	80−85 −8.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	85 +6.3%	80−85 −6.3%
Battlefield 5	147 +5%	140−150 −5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	123 +11.8%	110−120 −11.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	69 +6.2%	65−70 −6.2%
Far Cry 5	149 +6.4%	140−150 −6.4%
Far Cry New Dawn	140 +7.7%	130−140 −7.7%
Forza Horizon 4	121 +10%	110−120 −10%
Hitman 3	143 +10%	130−140 −10%
Horizon Zero Dawn	84 +5%	80−85 −5%
Metro Exodus	96 +6.7%	90−95 −6.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	58 +5.5%	55−60 −5.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	114 +3.6%	110−120 −3.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	184 +8.2%	170−180 −8.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion	91 +7.1%	85−90 −7.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	67 +11.7%	60−65 −11.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	63 +5%	60−65 −5%
Battlefield 5	137 +5.4%	130−140 −5.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	59 +7.3%	55−60 −7.3%
Far Cry 5	140 +7.7%	130−140 −7.7%
Far Cry New Dawn	127 +5.8%	120−130 −5.8%
Forza Horizon 4	112 +12%	100−105 −12%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	95 +5.6%	90−95 −5.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	64 +6.7%	60−65 −6.7%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	84 +5%	80−85 −5%
Hitman 3	87 +8.8%	80−85 −8.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn	60 +9.1%	55−60 −9.1%
Metro Exodus	58 +5.5%	55−60 −5.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	37 +5.7%	35−40 −5.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	78 +4%	75−80 −4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	35−40 +5.7%	35−40 −5.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	51 +13.3%	45−50 −13.3%
Battlefield 5	70−75 +4.3%	70−75 −4.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	38 +8.6%	35−40 −8.6%
Far Cry 5	101 +6.3%	95−100 −6.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	101 +6.3%	95−100 −6.3%
Forza Horizon 4	70−75 +7.7%	65−70 −7.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 +12.5%	40−45 −12.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	46 +15%	40−45 −15%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	49 +8.9%	45−50 −8.9%
Hitman 3	47 +4.4%	45−50 −4.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn	17 +6.3%	16−18 −6.3%
Metro Exodus	36 +20%	30−33 −20%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24 +14.3%	21−24 −14.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	42 +5%	40−45 −5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	68 +4.6%	65−70 −4.6%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	38 +8.6%	35−40 −8.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	32 +6.7%	30−33 −6.7%
Battlefield 5	71 +9.2%	65−70 −9.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	18 +12.5%	16−18 −12.5%
Far Cry 5	53 +6%	50−55 −6%
Far Cry New Dawn	56 +12%	50−55 −12%
Forza Horizon 4	73 +4.3%	70−75 −4.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	26 +8.3%	24−27 −8.3%

This is how Titan X Pascal and RTX 3050 8 GB compete in popular games:

Titan X Pascal is 5% faster than RTX 3050 8 GB in 1080p
Titan X Pascal is 8.6% faster than RTX 3050 8 GB in 1440p
Titan X Pascal is 7.3% faster than RTX 3050 8 GB in 4K

Advantages and disadvantages

Performance score	33.64	32.57
Recency	25 July 2016	4 January 2022
Cost	$1199	$249
Maximum RAM amount	12 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	16 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	130 Watt