GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile vs FX 5900 Ultra

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce FX 5900 Ultra with GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, including specs and performance data.

FX 5900 Ultra
2003
256 MB DDR, 59 Watt
0.11

RTX 3050 Ti Mobile outperforms FX 5900 Ultra by a whopping 23855% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1449212
Place by popularitynot in top-10066
Power efficiency0.1324.19
ArchitectureRankine (2003−2005)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameNV35GA106
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date23 October 2003 (21 year ago)11 May 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 coresno data2560
Core clock speed450 MHz735 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1035 MHz
Number of transistors135 million13,250 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)59 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate3.60082.80
Floating-point processing powerno data5.299 TFLOPS
ROPs448
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
InterfaceAGP 8xPCIe 4.0 x16
Length218 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x Molexno 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 typeDDRGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount256 MB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed425 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth27.2 GB/s192.0 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.0a12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.6
OpenGL1.5 (2.1)4.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.2
CUDA-8.6

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.

FX 5900 Ultra 0.11
RTX 3050 Ti Mobile 26.35
+23855%

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.

FX 5900 Ultra 41
RTX 3050 Ti Mobile 10128
+24602%

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-0−174
1440p-0−142
4K-0−128

Cost per frame, $

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 62
+0%
62
+0%
Elden Ring 80
+0%
80
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50
+0%
50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 128
+0%
128
+0%
Metro Exodus 84
+0%
84
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 98
+0%
98
+0%
Valorant 121
+0%
121
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40
+0%
40
+0%
Dota 2 102
+0%
102
+0%
Elden Ring 104
+0%
104
+0%
Far Cry 5 75
+0%
75
+0%
Fortnite 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 105
+0%
105
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 94
+0%
94
+0%
Metro Exodus 62
+0%
62
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 39
+0%
39
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Valorant 79
+0%
79
+0%
World of Tanks 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35
+0%
35
+0%
Dota 2 113
+0%
113
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90
+0%
90
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Valorant 112
+0%
112
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 41
+0%
41
+0%
Elden Ring 36
+0%
36
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 41
+0%
41
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
World of Tanks 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21
+0%
21
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 61
+0%
61
+0%
Metro Exodus 60
+0%
60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 81
+0%
81
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Dota 2 44
+0%
44
+0%
Elden Ring 19
+0%
19
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 44
+0%
44
+0%
Metro Exodus 21
+0%
21
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 44
+0%
44
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
+0%
10
+0%
Dota 2 54
+0%
54
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 34
+0%
34
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.11 26.35
Recency 23 October 2003 11 May 2021
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 130 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 59 Watt 75 Watt

FX 5900 Ultra has 27.1% lower power consumption.

RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, on the other hand, has a 23854.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 17 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1525% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce FX 5900 Ultra 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.


NVIDIA GeForce FX 5900 Ultra
GeForce FX 5900 Ultra
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile
GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile

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.


3.5 6 votes

Rate GeForce FX 5900 Ultra on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 4296 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.