GeForce RTX 5060 vs RTX 3050 4GB Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile with GeForce RTX 5060, including specs and performance data.
RTX 3050 4GB Mobile outperforms RTX 5060 by a moderate 16% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 237 | 271 |
| Place by popularity | 58 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 28.04 | 8.52 |
| Architecture | Ampere (2020−2024) | Blackwell 2.0 (2025) |
| GPU code name | GN20-P0 | GB206 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 11 May 2021 (3 years ago) | March 2025 (recently) |
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 cores | 2048 | 4608 |
| Core clock speed | 1238 MHz | 2235 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1500 MHz | 2520 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 8 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 60 Watt (35 - 80 Watt TGP) | 170 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 362.9 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 23.22 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 48 |
| TMUs | no data | 144 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 144 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 36 |
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 size | large | no data |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 5.0 x16 |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 16-pin |
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 type | GDDR6 | GDDR7 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 12000 MHz | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 448.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | + | + |
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 Connectors | no data | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_2 | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.4 |
| CUDA | - | 10.1 |
| DLSS | - | + |
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 | 63
+26%
| 50−55
−26%
|
| 1440p | 46
+31.4%
| 35−40
−31.4%
|
| 4K | 29
+20.8%
| 24−27
−20.8%
|
FPS performance in popular games
- Full HD
Low Preset - Full HD
Medium Preset - Full HD
High Preset - Full HD
Ultra Preset - Full HD
Epic Preset - 1440p
High Preset - 1440p
Ultra Preset - 1440p
Epic Preset - 4K
High Preset - 4K
Ultra Preset - 4K
Epic Preset
| Atomic Heart | 71
+34%
|
50−55
−34%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 170
+49.1%
|
110−120
−49.1%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 66
+57.1%
|
40−45
−57.1%
|
| Atomic Heart | 54
+1.9%
|
50−55
−1.9%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 93
+13.4%
|
80−85
−13.4%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 125
+9.6%
|
110−120
−9.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 52
+23.8%
|
40−45
−23.8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 68
+1.5%
|
65−70
−1.5%
|
| Fortnite | 110−120
+10.6%
|
100−110
−10.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 90−95
+15%
|
80−85
−15%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 87
+38.1%
|
60−65
−38.1%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 85−90
+18.7%
|
75−80
−18.7%
|
| Valorant | 160−170
+10.3%
|
140−150
−10.3%
|
| Atomic Heart | 32
−65.6%
|
50−55
+65.6%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 89
+8.5%
|
80−85
−8.5%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 36
−217%
|
110−120
+217%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 250−260
+7.7%
|
230−240
−7.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 41
−2.4%
|
40−45
+2.4%
|
| Dota 2 | 118
+18%
|
100−105
−18%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 64
−4.7%
|
65−70
+4.7%
|
| Fortnite | 110−120
+10.6%
|
100−110
−10.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 90−95
+15%
|
80−85
−15%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 77
+22.2%
|
60−65
−22.2%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 86
+16.2%
|
70−75
−16.2%
|
| Metro Exodus | 49
+14%
|
40−45
−14%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 85−90
+18.7%
|
75−80
−18.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 81
+42.1%
|
55−60
−42.1%
|
| Valorant | 160−170
+10.3%
|
140−150
−10.3%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 83
+1.2%
|
80−85
−1.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 34
−23.5%
|
40−45
+23.5%
|
| Dota 2 | 112
+17.9%
|
95−100
−17.9%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 61
−9.8%
|
65−70
+9.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 90−95
+15%
|
80−85
−15%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 85−90
+18.7%
|
75−80
−18.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 46
−23.9%
|
55−60
+23.9%
|
| Valorant | 160−170
+10.3%
|
140−150
−10.3%
|
| Fortnite | 110−120
+10.6%
|
100−110
−10.6%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+19%
|
40−45
−19%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 160−170
+14%
|
140−150
−14%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 48
+41.2%
|
30−35
−41.2%
|
| Metro Exodus | 29
+11.5%
|
24−27
−11.5%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+1.8%
|
170−180
−1.8%
|
| Valorant | 200−210
+8.7%
|
180−190
−8.7%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 66
+17.9%
|
55−60
−17.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18
−5.6%
|
18−20
+5.6%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 49
+8.9%
|
45−50
−8.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 55−60
+18%
|
50−55
−18%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 35−40
+18.8%
|
30−35
−18.8%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+19.6%
|
45−50
−19.6%
|
| Atomic Heart | 18−20
+12.5%
|
16−18
−12.5%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+27.8%
|
18−20
−27.8%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 44
+22.2%
|
35−40
−22.2%
|
| Metro Exodus | 17
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 29
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
+18.6%
|
110−120
−18.6%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 35
+16.7%
|
30−33
−16.7%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+27.8%
|
18−20
−27.8%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6
−33.3%
|
8−9
+33.3%
|
| Dota 2 | 62
+24%
|
50−55
−24%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 19
−15.8%
|
21−24
+15.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+14.3%
|
35−40
−14.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 24−27
+20%
|
20−22
−20%
|
| Fortnite | 24−27
+25%
|
20−22
−25%
|
This is how RTX 3050 4GB Mobile and RTX 5060 compete in popular games:
- RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is 26% faster in 1080p
- RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is 31% faster in 1440p
- RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is 21% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is 57% faster.
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 5060 is 217% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is ahead in 49 tests (82%)
- RTX 5060 is ahead in 10 tests (17%)
- there's a draw in 1 test (2%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 21.11 | 18.17 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 8 GB |
| Chip lithography | 8 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 60 Watt | 170 Watt |
RTX 3050 4GB Mobile has a 16.2% higher aggregate performance score, and 183.3% lower power consumption.
RTX 5060, on the other hand, has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 60% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce RTX 5060 in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is a notebook card while GeForce RTX 5060 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
