GeForce RTX 3050 8 GB vs Radeon RX 5950

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated162
Place by popularitynot in top-10011
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data69.00
Power efficiencyno data17.41
ArchitectureRDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameNavi 21GA106
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)4 January 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$249

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 cores48642560
Core clock speedno data1552 MHz
Boost clock speed1535 MHz1777 MHz
Number of transistors21,000 million12,000 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)350 Watt130 Watt
Texture fill rate466.6142.2
Floating-point processing power14.93 TFLOPS9.098 TFLOPS
ROPs9632
TMUs30480
Tensor Coresno data80
Ray Tracing Coresno data20

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).

InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data242 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pin1x 8-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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount24 GB8 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed14000 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth672.0 GB/s224.0 GB/s

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 HDMI, 3x DisplayPort1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI++

API compatibility

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

DirectX12.0 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.3
CUDA-8.6

Pros & cons summary


Maximum RAM amount 24 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 7 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 350 Watt 130 Watt

RX 5950 has a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.

RTX 3050 8 GB, on the other hand, has 169.2% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX 5950 and GeForce RTX 3050 8 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 RX 5950
Radeon RX 5950
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 8 GB
GeForce RTX 3050 8 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.


5 9 votes

Rate Radeon RX 5950 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 12144 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3050 8 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.