GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile vs ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3470

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 3470 and GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

ATI Mobility HD 3470
2008
256 MB DDR2, 12 Watt
0.24

RTX 2050 Mobile outperforms ATI Mobility HD 3470 by a whopping 7708% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1365298
Place by popularitynot in top-10017
Power efficiency1.3828.67
ArchitectureTeraScale (2005−2013)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameM82GA107
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date7 January 2008 (17 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 cores402048
Core clock speed680 MHz1185 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1477 MHz
Number of transistors181 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology55 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)12 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate2.72094.53
Floating-point processing power0.0544 TFLOPS6.05 TFLOPS
ROPs432
TMUs464
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 sizeno datalarge
InterfaceMXM-IIPCIe 3.0 x8

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 typeDDR2GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount256 MB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed400 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth6.4 GB/s112.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+
G-SYNC support-+

Supported technologies

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

VR Readyno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX10.112 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.16.6
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA-8.6

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
1440p-0−133
4K-0−125

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−350%
36
+350%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−2350%
49
+2350%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−275%
30
+275%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−950%
21
+950%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−1420%
76
+1420%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−1000%
40−45
+1000%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−238%
27
+238%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−650%
15
+650%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−1067%
70
+1067%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−1160%
63
+1160%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−2033%
120−130
+2033%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−1000%
40−45
+1000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−1350%
55−60
+1350%
World of Tanks 12−14
−1758%
220−230
+1758%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−313%
30−35
+313%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−550%
13
+550%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−967%
60−65
+967%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−1020%
56
+1020%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−2033%
120−130
+2033%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
−16600%
160−170
+16600%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−77.8%
16−18
+77.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−650%
14−16
+650%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−1125%
45−50
+1125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−1150%
24−27
+1150%
Valorant 4−5
−1100%
45−50
+1100%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 14−16
−113%
30−35
+113%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−113%
30−35
+113%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 0−1 55−60
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−113%
30−35
+113%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 18−20
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Dota 2 14−16
−127%
34
+127%
Valorant 0−1 21−24

Full HD
Low Preset

Elden Ring 43
+0%
43
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Valorant 87
+0%
87
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Dota 2 85
+0%
85
+0%
Elden Ring 59
+0%
59
+0%
Fortnite 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 69
+0%
69
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Valorant 43
+0%
43
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Dota 2 110
+0%
110
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 37
+0%
37
+0%
Elden Ring 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 37
+0%
37
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
World of Tanks 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 47
+0%
47
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Elden Ring 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

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

  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 2050 Mobile is 16600% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RTX 2050 Mobile is ahead in 30 tests (50%)
  • there's a draw in 30 tests (50%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.24 18.74
Recency 7 January 2008 17 December 2021
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 45 Watt

ATI Mobility HD 3470 has 275% lower power consumption.

RTX 2050 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 7708.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 587.5% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 3470 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.


ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3470
Mobility Radeon HD 3470
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile
GeForce RTX 2050 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.


3.8 60 votes

Rate Mobility Radeon HD 3470 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 2329 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.