GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile vs GT 130M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 130M and GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GT 130M
2009
Up to 1 GB GDDR3, 23 Watt
0.38

RTX 2050 Mobile outperforms GT 130M by a whopping 4816% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1267296
Place by popularitynot in top-10020
Power efficiency1.1328.46
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameG96CGA107
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date8 January 2009 (15 years ago)17 December 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 cores322048
Core clock speed600 MHz1185 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1477 MHz
Number of transistors314 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology55 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate9.60094.53
Floating-point processing power0.096 TFLOPS6.05 TFLOPS
Gigaflops144no data
ROPs832
TMUs1664
Tensor Coresno data256
Ray Tracing Coresno data32

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 sizemedium sizedlarge
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data
SLI options2-way-

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 1 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed500 (DDR2)/800 (GDDR3) MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth16 (DDR2)/25 (GDDR3)112.0 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 ConnectorsSingle Link DVIDisplayPortVGAHDMIDual Link DVI1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
G-SYNC support-+

Supported technologies

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

Power management8.0no data
VR Readyno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.6
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
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.

GT 130M 0.38
RTX 2050 Mobile 18.68
+4816%

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.

GT 130M 1629
RTX 2050 Mobile 46821
+2774%

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 HD0−142
1440p0−134
4K0−125

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−2350%
49
+2350%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−1300%
40−45
+1300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−1800%
35−40
+1800%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−2000%
42
+2000%
Hitman 3 4−5
−1000%
44
+1000%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−1038%
90−95
+1038%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−1425%
60−65
+1425%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−214%
85−90
+214%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−1300%
40−45
+1300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−1800%
35−40
+1800%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−1400%
30
+1400%
Hitman 3 4−5
−975%
43
+975%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−1038%
90−95
+1038%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−1450%
62
+1450%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−367%
40−45
+367%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−214%
85−90
+214%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−1300%
40−45
+1300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−1800%
35−40
+1800%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−1150%
25
+1150%
Hitman 3 4−5
−875%
39
+875%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−1038%
90−95
+1038%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−1275%
55
+1275%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−267%
33
+267%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+55.6%
18
−55.6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 10−12
Hitman 3 6−7
−267%
21−24
+267%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−1800%
35−40
+1800%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−1450%
30−35
+1450%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−1000%
10−12
+1000%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 9−10

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−700%
16−18
+700%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 42
+0%
42
+0%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21
+0%
21
+0%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7
+0%
7
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 47
+0%
47
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hitman 3 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GT 130M is 56% faster.
  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the RTX 2050 Mobile is 2350% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GT 130M is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • RTX 2050 Mobile is ahead in 28 tests (40%)
  • there's a draw in 41 test (59%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.38 18.68
Recency 8 January 2009 17 December 2021
Chip lithography 55 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 45 Watt

GT 130M has 95.7% lower power consumption.

RTX 2050 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 4815.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, and a 587.5% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 130M 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 GT 130M
GeForce GT 130M
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile
GeForce RTX 2050 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.


4 22 votes

Rate GeForce GT 130M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 2195 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 2050 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.