GeForce GTX 1050 3GB Mobile vs Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile

Place in performance ranking	192	367
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	6.47	no data
Architecture	Turing (2018−2021)	Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code name	N19E-Q1	no data
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	27 May 2019 (5 years ago)	April 2018 (6 years ago)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	1920	768
Core clock speed	945 MHz	1366 MHz
Boost clock speed	1380 MHz	1442 MHz
Number of transistors	10,800 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	80 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	198.7	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile and GeForce GTX 1050 3GB Mobile compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop size	large	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	no 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 type	GDDR6	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	3 MB
Memory bus width	192 Bit	96 Bit
Memory clock speed	14000 MHz	1752 MHz
Memory bandwidth	448.0 GB/s	84 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no data

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 outputs	no data
G-SYNC support	+	+

Supported technologies

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

VR Ready	+	no data
Multi-Projection	no data	+
Multi Monitor	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_1)	no data
Shader Model	6.5	no data
OpenGL	4.6	no data
OpenCL	1.2	no data
Vulkan	1.2.131	+
CUDA	7.5	no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

RTX 3000 Mobile 26.20
+104%

Nvidia GTX 1050 3GB Mobile 12.82

Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile outperforms GeForce GTX 1050 3GB Mobile by 104% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

RTX 3000 Mobile 14842
+132%

Nvidia GTX 1050 3GB Mobile 6401

Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile outperforms GeForce GTX 1050 3GB Mobile by 132% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

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	97 +116%	45−50 −116%
4K	88 +120%	40−45 −120%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

40−45
+105%

21−24

−105%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	77 +120%	35−40 −120%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	45−50 +114%	21−24 −114%
Battlefield 5	85−90 +115%	40−45 −115%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 +121%	24−27 −121%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 +105%	21−24 −105%
Far Cry 5	60−65 +122%	27−30 −122%
Far Cry New Dawn	65−70 +127%	30−33 −127%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +105%	55−60 −105%
Hitman 3	50−55 +121%	24−27 −121%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−110 +112%	50−55 −112%
Metro Exodus	80−85 +110%	40−45 −110%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 +130%	30−33 −130%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	90−95 +125%	40−45 −125%
Watch Dogs: Legion	70−75 +109%	35−40 −109%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	62 +107%	30−33 −107%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	45−50 +114%	21−24 −114%
Battlefield 5	85−90 +115%	40−45 −115%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 +121%	24−27 −121%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 +105%	21−24 −105%
Far Cry 5	60−65 +122%	27−30 −122%
Far Cry New Dawn	65−70 +127%	30−33 −127%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +105%	55−60 −105%
Hitman 3	50−55 +121%	24−27 −121%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−110 +112%	50−55 −112%
Metro Exodus	43 +105%	21−24 −105%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 +130%	30−33 −130%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	90−95 +125%	40−45 −125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	109 +118%	50−55 −118%
Watch Dogs: Legion	70−75 +109%	35−40 −109%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	39 +117%	18−20 −117%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	45−50 +114%	21−24 −114%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 +121%	24−27 −121%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 +105%	21−24 −105%
Far Cry 5	60−65 +122%	27−30 −122%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +105%	55−60 −105%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−110 +112%	50−55 −112%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	90−95 +125%	40−45 −125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	56 +107%	27−30 −107%
Watch Dogs: Legion	70−75 +109%	35−40 −109%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

65−70
+130%

30−33

−130%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 +108%	24−27 −108%
Far Cry New Dawn	50−55 +121%	24−27 −121%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	27−30 +125%	12−14 −125%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	24−27 +117%	12−14 −117%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 +125%	16−18 −125%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +113%	8−9 −113%
Far Cry 5	45−50 +119%	21−24 −119%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +129%	24−27 −129%
Hitman 3	30−35 +121%	14−16 −121%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +125%	24−27 −125%
Metro Exodus	50−55 +108%	24−27 −108%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	55−60 +115%	27−30 −115%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 +106%	16−18 −106%
Watch Dogs: Legion	18−20 +111%	9−10 −111%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

40−45
+110%

21−24

−110%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +117%	12−14 −117%
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24 +110%	10−11 −110%
Hitman 3	21−24 +110%	10−11 −110%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 +133%	12−14 −133%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	20−22 +122%	9−10 −122%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 +107%	14−16 −107%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 +129%	7−8 −129%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 +133%	6−7 −133%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +114%	7−8 −114%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +114%	7−8 −114%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +125%	16−18 −125%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 +133%	12−14 −133%
Metro Exodus	27−30 +133%	12−14 −133%
Watch Dogs: Legion	12−14 +140%	5−6 −140%