GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile vs HD Graphics 505
Aggregate performance score
We've compared HD Graphics 505 and GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
RTX 5050 Mobile outperforms HD Graphics 505 by a whopping 5532% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1167 | 73 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 10.79 | 72.94 |
| Architecture | Generation 9.0 (2015−2016) | Blackwell 2.0 (2025) |
| GPU code name | Apollo Lake GT1.5 | GB207 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 1 September 2016 (8 years ago) | 24 June 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 | 144 | 2560 |
| Core clock speed | 200 MHz | 2235 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 650 MHz | 2520 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 189 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 11.70 | 201.6 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.1872 TFLOPS | 12.9 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 3 | 32 |
| TMUs | 18 | 80 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 80 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 20 |
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 | no data | medium sized |
| Interface | Ring Bus | PCIe 5.0 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 type | DDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 224.0 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 | Portable Device Dependent | Portable Device Dependent |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Quick Sync | + | no data |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4 |
| CUDA | - | 12.0 |
| DLSS | - | + |
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.
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.
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 | 9
−5456%
| 500−550
+5456%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−5800%
|
110−120
+5800%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−5800%
|
110−120
+5800%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 210−220 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−5500%
|
280−290
+5500%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−2063%
|
170−180
+2063%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−828%
|
260−270
+828%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 21−24
−1113%
|
270−280
+1113%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−5800%
|
110−120
+5800%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−5257%
|
750−800
+5257%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 210−220 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−5500%
|
280−290
+5500%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−5400%
|
55−60
+5400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−2063%
|
170−180
+2063%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−3050%
|
180−190
+3050%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−828%
|
260−270
+828%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−5800%
|
110−120
+5800%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−5257%
|
750−800
+5257%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−5500%
|
280−290
+5500%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−2063%
|
170−180
+2063%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−3050%
|
180−190
+3050%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−5417%
|
1600−1650
+5417%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 210−220 |
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2
−13300%
|
130−140
+13300%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 4−5
−8575%
|
300−350
+8575%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−5456%
|
500−550
+5456%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−5400%
|
110−120
+5400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 0−1 | 100−110 |
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 1−2
−13400%
|
130−140
+13400%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
−613%
|
110−120
+613%
|
| Valorant | 5−6
−5660%
|
280−290
+5660%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−3800%
|
75−80
+3800%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
−3400%
|
70−75
+3400%
|
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 250−260
+0%
|
250−260
+0%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 140−150
+0%
|
140−150
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 250−260
+0%
|
250−260
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 250−260
+0%
|
250−260
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 140−150
+0%
|
140−150
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Valorant | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
This is how HD Graphics 505 and RTX 5050 Mobile compete in popular games:
- RTX 5050 Mobile is 5456% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Fortnite, with 1440p resolution and the Epic Preset, the RTX 5050 Mobile is 13400% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RTX 5050 Mobile is ahead in 19 tests (59%)
- there's a draw in 13 tests (41%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.85 | 47.87 |
| Recency | 1 September 2016 | 24 June 2025 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 50 Watt |
HD Graphics 505 has 400% lower power consumption.
RTX 5050 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 5531.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 505 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
