GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB vs Radeon Graphics 384SP

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated308
Place by popularitynot in top-10025
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data36.20
Power efficiencyno data13.40
ArchitectureGCN 5.1 (2018−2022)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameCezanneGA107
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date13 April 2021 (3 years ago)27 January 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores3842048
Core clock speed300 MHz1545 MHz
Boost clock speed1700 MHz1740 MHz
Number of transistors9,800 million8,700 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt90 Watt
Texture fill rate40.80111.4
Floating-point processing power1.306 TFLOPS7.127 TFLOPS
ROPs832
TMUs2464
Tensor Coresno data64
Ray Tracing Coresno data16

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).

InterfaceIGPPCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data242 mm
WidthIGP2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared4 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data192.0 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 HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.7 (6.4)6.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.13.0
Vulkan1.31.3
CUDA-8.6

Pros & cons summary


Recency 13 April 2021 27 January 2022
Chip lithography 7 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 90 Watt

Graphics 384SP has a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.

RTX 3050 4 GB, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 9 months.

We couldn't decide between Radeon Graphics 384SP and GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB. We've got no test results to judge.


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.


AMD Radeon Graphics 384SP
Radeon Graphics 384SP
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB
GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.4 20 votes

Rate Radeon Graphics 384SP on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 2582 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB 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.