GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile vs 315M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 315M and GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GeForce 315M
2011
Up to 512 MB GDDR3, 14 Watt
0.30

RTX 4050 Mobile outperforms 315M by a whopping 12393% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1330124
Place by popularitynot in top-10054
Power efficiency1.4751.37
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameGT218AD107
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date5 January 2011 (13 years ago)3 January 2023 (1 year 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 cores162560
Core clock speed606 MHz1455 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1755 MHz
Number of transistors260 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)14 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate4.848140.4
Floating-point processing power0.03878 TFLOPS8.986 TFLOPS
Gigaflops73no data
ROPs432
TMUs880
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
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16

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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amountUp to 512 MB6 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit96 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz16000 GB/s
Memory bandwidth12.8 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 ConnectorsDisplayPortHDMIVGADual Link DVISingle Link DVIPortable Device Dependent
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

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

Power management8.0no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.16.7
OpenGL4.14.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+8.9

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.

GeForce 315M 0.30
RTX 4050 Mobile 37.48
+12393%

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.

GeForce 315M 115
RTX 4050 Mobile 14445
+12461%

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.

GeForce 315M 1109
RTX 4050 Mobile 85660
+7628%

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 HD0−195
1440p-0−146
4K-0−131

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−5050%
103
+5050%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−2667%
80−85
+2667%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−3850%
75−80
+3850%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−4050%
83
+4050%
Hitman 3 4−5
−1975%
80−85
+1975%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−1938%
160−170
+1938%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−3475%
140−150
+3475%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−357%
120−130
+357%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−2667%
80−85
+2667%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−3850%
75−80
+3850%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−3450%
71
+3450%
Hitman 3 4−5
−1975%
80−85
+1975%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−1938%
160−170
+1938%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−4100%
168
+4100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−800%
80−85
+800%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−357%
120−130
+357%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−2667%
80−85
+2667%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−3850%
75−80
+3850%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−3150%
65
+3150%
Hitman 3 4−5
−1975%
80−85
+1975%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−1938%
160−170
+1938%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−3525%
145
+3525%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−789%
80
+789%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−85.7%
52
+85.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 36
Hitman 3 6−7
−750%
50−55
+750%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−4150%
85−90
+4150%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−3250%
65−70
+3250%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−2500%
24−27
+2500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 24−27

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−1650%
35−40
+1650%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 117
+0%
117
+0%
Battlefield 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Metro Exodus 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 92
+0%
92
+0%
Battlefield 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Metro Exodus 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 70
+0%
70
+0%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Metro Exodus 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 84
+0%
84
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 59
+0%
59
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Hitman 3 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 47
+0%
47
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+0%
18
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 53
+0%
53
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 26
+0%
26
+0%

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

  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the RTX 4050 Mobile is 5050% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RTX 4050 Mobile is ahead in 29 tests (41%)
  • there's a draw in 41 test (59%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.30 37.48
Recency 5 January 2011 3 January 2023
Chip lithography 40 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 14 Watt 50 Watt

GeForce 315M has 257.1% lower power consumption.

RTX 4050 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 12393.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, and a 900% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 315M in performance tests.


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.


NVIDIA GeForce 315M
GeForce 315M
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile
GeForce RTX 4050 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.


3 157 votes

Rate GeForce 315M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 2747 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 4050 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.