GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB vs Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)

Place in the ranking	661	204
Place by popularity	36	21
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	75.15
Power efficiency	20.74	27.30
Architecture	Vega (2017−2020)	Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code name	Vega Raven Ridge	GA107
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	26 October 2017 (7 years ago)	2 February 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$179

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 cores	512	2304
Core clock speed	300 MHz	1042 MHz
Boost clock speed	1200 MHz	1470 MHz
Number of transistors	9,800 million	8,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	70 Watt
Texture fill rate	57.60	105.8
Floating-point processing power	1.843 TFLOPS	6.774 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	32
TMUs	32	72
Tensor Cores	no data	72
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	18

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).

Interface	IGP	PCIe 4.0 x8
Length	no data	242 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

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	System Shared	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	6 GB
Memory bus width	System Shared	96 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	168.0 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 Connectors	No outputs	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.1	3.0
Vulkan	1.2	1.3
CUDA	-	8.6

Synthetic benchmark performance

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

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark 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.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 4.52

RTX 3050 6 GB 27.76
+514%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 1737

RTX 3050 6 GB 10670
+514%

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	17 −488%	100−110 +488%
4K	11 −491%	65−70 +491%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	1.79
4K	no data	2.75

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −483%	70−75 +483%
Cyberpunk 2077	9 −511%	55−60 +511%
Elden Ring	10−12 −491%	65−70 +491%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	10 −500%	60−65 +500%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −483%	70−75 +483%
Cyberpunk 2077	4 −500%	24−27 +500%
Forza Horizon 4	22 −491%	130−140 +491%
Metro Exodus	13 −477%	75−80 +477%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16 −494%	95−100 +494%
Valorant	22 −491%	130−140 +491%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 −477%	75−80 +477%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −483%	70−75 +483%
Cyberpunk 2077	3 −500%	18−20 +500%
Dota 2	22 −491%	130−140 +491%
Elden Ring	5 −500%	30−33 +500%
Far Cry 5	17 −488%	100−105 +488%
Fortnite	18 −511%	110−120 +511%
Forza Horizon 4	16 −494%	95−100 +494%
Grand Theft Auto V	13 −477%	75−80 +477%
Metro Exodus	8 −463%	45−50 +463%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	37 −495%	220−230 +495%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −507%	85−90 +507%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6 −483%	35−40 +483%
Valorant	9−10 −511%	55−60 +511%
World of Tanks	42 −495%	250−260 +495%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6 −483%	35−40 +483%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −483%	70−75 +483%
Cyberpunk 2077	3 −500%	18−20 +500%
Dota 2	35 −500%	210−220 +500%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −509%	140−150 +509%
Forza Horizon 4	14 −507%	85−90 +507%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	10 −500%	60−65 +500%
Valorant	15 −500%	90−95 +500%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	3−4 −500%	18−20 +500%
Elden Ring	5−6 −500%	30−33 +500%
Grand Theft Auto V	4−5 −500%	24−27 +500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−35 −513%	190−200 +513%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −500%	18−20 +500%
World of Tanks	30−35 −494%	190−200 +494%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 −483%	35−40 +483%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −511%	55−60 +511%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −500%	24−27 +500%
Far Cry 5	10−11 −500%	60−65 +500%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −483%	35−40 +483%
Metro Exodus	2−3 −500%	12−14 +500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 −483%	35−40 +483%
Valorant	12−14 −477%	75−80 +477%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 −488%	100−105 +488%
Elden Ring	2−3 −500%	12−14 +500%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 −494%	95−100 +494%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14 −507%	85−90 +507%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −500%	18−20 +500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −494%	95−100 +494%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 −500%	24−27 +500%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Dota 2	15 −500%	90−95 +500%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −500%	30−33 +500%
Fortnite	3−4 −500%	18−20 +500%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 −500%	18−20 +500%
Valorant	4−5 −500%	24−27 +500%

This is how RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) and RTX 3050 6 GB compete in popular games:

RTX 3050 6 GB is 488% faster in 1080p
RTX 3050 6 GB is 491% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	4.52	27.76
Recency	26 October 2017	2 February 2024
Chip lithography	14 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	70 Watt

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) has 366.7% lower power consumption.

RTX 3050 6 GB, on the other hand, has a 514.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is a notebook card while GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.