GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile vs Quadro P5000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
P104-100 P104-101 Quadro P4000 Quadro P5000 Tesla P4 Tesla P6
VS
RTX 3050 4GB Mobile RTX 3050 6GB Mobile RTX 3050 A Mobile RTX 3050 Max-Q RTX 3050 Max-Q Refresh RTX 3050 Max-Q Refresh 4 GB RTX 3050 Max-Q Refresh 6 GB RTX 3050 Mobile RTX 3050 Mobile Refresh RTX 3050 Mobile Refresh 4 GB RTX 3050 Mobile Refresh 6 GB RTX 3050 Ti Max-Q RTX 3050 Ti Mobile

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P5000 with GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile, including specs and performance data.

Quadro P5000
2016
16 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
32.86
+30.4%

P5000 outperforms RTX 3050 6GB Mobile by a substantial 30% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Quadro P5000 Quadro P5000
RTX 3050 6GB Mobile RTX 3050 6GB

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking172226
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation7.25no data
Power efficiency12.5228.78
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGP104GN20-P0-R 6 GB
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date1 October 2016 (8 years ago)6 January 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,499 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores20482560
Core clock speed1607 MHz1237 MHz
Boost clock speed1733 MHz1492 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology16 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt60 Watt (35 - 80 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate277.3no data
Floating-point processing power8.873 TFLOPSno data
ROPs64no data
TMUs160no data

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
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount16 GB6 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit96 Bit
Memory clock speed1127 MHz12000 MHz
Memory bandwidth192 GB/sno data
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 Connectors1x DVI, 4x DisplayPortno data
Display Port1.4no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
3D Stereo+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1212_2
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.5no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.2.131-
CUDA6.1-

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 HD93
+31%
71
−31%
1440p40−45
+17.6%
34
−17.6%
4K41
+36.7%
30−35
−36.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p26.87no data
1440p62.48no data
4K60.95no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 85−90
+35.4%
65−70
−35.4%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+41.3%
45−50
−41.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
−17.4%
81
+17.4%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 85−90
+35.4%
65−70
−35.4%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+20.2%
90−95
−20.2%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+41.3%
45−50
−41.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+7.8%
64
−7.8%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+19.3%
83
−19.3%
Fortnite 140−150
+19.7%
110−120
−19.7%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+27.7%
90−95
−27.7%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
+32.8%
65−70
−32.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+32.6%
90−95
−32.6%
Valorant 190−200
+18.4%
160−170
−18.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 85−90
+35.4%
65−70
−35.4%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+20.2%
90−95
−20.2%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+62.5%
40
−62.5%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+7.8%
250−260
−7.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+50%
46
−50%
Dota 2 130−140
+11.6%
120−130
−11.6%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+30.3%
76
−30.3%
Fortnite 140−150
+19.7%
110−120
−19.7%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+27.7%
90−95
−27.7%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
+32.8%
65−70
−32.8%
Grand Theft Auto V 100−110
+17.6%
91
−17.6%
Metro Exodus 70−75
+34.6%
50−55
−34.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+32.6%
90−95
−32.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 98
+7.7%
91
−7.7%
Valorant 190−200
+18.4%
160−170
−18.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+20.2%
90−95
−20.2%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+41.3%
45−50
−41.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+76.9%
39
−76.9%
Dota 2 130−140
+11.6%
120−130
−11.6%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+39.4%
71
−39.4%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+27.7%
90−95
−27.7%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
+32.8%
65−70
−32.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+32.6%
90−95
−32.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 53
+6%
50
−6%
Valorant 190−200
+18.4%
160−170
−18.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 140−150
+19.7%
110−120
−19.7%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220
+26.9%
160−170
−26.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+47.5%
40
−47.5%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+34.4%
30−35
−34.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 230−240
+13.3%
200−210
−13.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+24.2%
65−70
−24.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+43.5%
21−24
−43.5%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+38.5%
52
−38.5%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+36.1%
60−65
−36.1%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+28.6%
40−45
−28.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+45.9%
37
−45.9%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 75−80
+37.5%
55−60
−37.5%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27
+26.3%
18−20
−26.3%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+36.4%
10−12
−36.4%
Grand Theft Auto V 60−65
+38.6%
40−45
−38.6%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+35%
20−22
−35%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 36
+2.9%
35−40
−2.9%
Valorant 180−190
+34.3%
130−140
−34.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+33.3%
35−40
−33.3%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+36.4%
10−12
−36.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Dota 2 90−95
+20.5%
75−80
−20.5%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+40.7%
27−30
−40.7%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+31%
40−45
−31%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+40.9%
21−24
−40.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+44%
24−27
−44%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 35−40
+38.5%
24−27
−38.5%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

This is how Quadro P5000 and RTX 3050 6GB Mobile compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P5000 is 31% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro P5000 is 18% faster in 1440p
  • Quadro P5000 is 37% faster in 4K

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

  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro P5000 is 77% faster.
  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the RTX 3050 6GB Mobile is 17% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro P5000 is ahead in 64 tests (96%)
  • RTX 3050 6GB Mobile is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 32.86 25.19
Recency 1 October 2016 6 January 2023
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 60 Watt

Quadro P5000 has a 30.4% higher aggregate performance score, and a 166.7% higher maximum VRAM amount.

RTX 3050 6GB Mobile, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P5000 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P5000 is a workstation card while GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile is a notebook one.

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 Quadro P5000
Quadro P5000
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile
GeForce RTX 3050 6GB
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Quadro P5000 Quadro P5000
vs
Pro 5700 XT Radeon Pro 5700 XT
RTX 3050 6GB Mobile GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile
vs
RTX 2060 Max-Q GeForce RTX 2060 Max-Q
Quadro P5000 Quadro P5000
vs
Pro VII Radeon Pro VII
GeForce 710M GeForce 710M
vs
GT 220 220
Pro Duo Polaris AMD Pro Duo Polaris
vs
RX 5700 XT 5700 XT
RTX 3080 Mobile NVIDIA RTX 3080 Mobile
vs
T550 Mobile Mobile
RX 570 AMD RX 570
vs
Pro VII VII
RTX 2080 NVIDIA RTX 2080
vs
Apple M3 Max 40-Core GPU 40-Core GPU
HD 6770 AMD HD 6770
vs
GT 1030 DDR4 1030 DDR4
9600M GT GeForce 9600M GT
vs
8600 GT 8600 GT
8600 GS GeForce 8600 GS
vs
RTX 4090 4090
9800M GTX GeForce 9800M GTX
vs
GT 330M 330M
Pro 555X AMD Pro 555X
vs
Radeon 610M 610M

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.6 183 votes

Rate Quadro P5000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 754 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro P5000 or GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.