Component comparison
GeForce RTX 3050 vs GeForce RTX 3070 Ti
GeForce RTX 3050 vs GeForce RTX 3070 Ti — detailed GPU comparison: performance, gaming FPS, specifications.
Advantages
A
GeForce RTX 3050
- + Die size (mm²) (+192 mm²)
B
GeForce RTX 3070 Ti
- + Release year (+1)
- + VRAM (GB) (+4 GB)
- + Memory clock (MHz) (+250 MHz)
- + Bandwidth (GB/s) (+416 GB/s)
- + Memory bus (bit) (+128 bit)
- + TGP / TDP (W) (+40 W)
- + Transistors (M) (+8,700M)
- + CUDA cores (+4096)
- + TMUs (+128)
- + ROPs (+64)
- + RT cores (+32)
- + Tensor cores (+128)
- + FP32 performance (TFLOPS) (+16.25 TFLOPS)
- + Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) (+126.92 GPixel/s)
- + Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) (+253.85 GTexel/s)
- + Energy efficiency (+11.0)
- + PassMark (overall) (+5425)
- + 3DMark Time Spy (+5965)
- + 3DMark Fire Strike (+15827)
- + Normalized score (+0.5)
Detailed spec comparison
| Spec |
Component A
GeForce RTX 3050
|
Component B
GeForce RTX 3070 Ti
|
|---|---|---|
| Release year | 2021 | 2022 (+1) |
| VRAM (GB) | 4 GB | 8 GB (+4 GB) |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Memory clock (MHz) | 1500 MHz | 1750 MHz (+250 MHz) |
| Bandwidth (GB/s) | 192 GB/s | 608 GB/s (+416 GB/s) |
| Memory bus (bit) | 128 bit | 256 bit (+128 bit) |
| TGP / TDP (W) | 75 W | 115 W (+40 W) |
| Lithography (nm) | 8 nm | 8 nm |
| Transistors (M) | 8,700M | 17,400M (+8,700M) |
| Die size (mm²) | 200 mm² (+192 mm²) | 392 mm² |
| Base clock (MHz) | 1065 MHz | — |
| Boost clock (MHz) | 1343 MHz | — |
| CUDA cores | 2,048 | 6,144 (+4096) |
| TMUs | 64 | 192 (+128) |
| ROPs | 32 | 96 (+64) |
| RT cores | 16 | 48 (+32) |
| Tensor cores | 64 | 192 (+128) |
| FP32 performance (TFLOPS) | 5.50 TFLOPS | 21.75 TFLOPS (+16.25 TFLOPS) |
| Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) | 42.98 GPixel/s | 169.90 GPixel/s (+126.92 GPixel/s) |
| Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) | 85.95 GTexel/s | 339.80 GTexel/s (+253.85 GTexel/s) |
| Energy efficiency | 17.0 | 27.9 (+11.0) |
| PassMark (overall) | 11,878 | 17,303 (+5425) |
| 3DMark Time Spy | 4,497 | 10,462 (+5965) |
| 3DMark Fire Strike | 11,949 | 27,776 (+15827) |
| Geekbench OpenCL | 63,465 | — |
| Geekbench Vulkan | 62,164 | — |
| Normalized score | 63.1 | 63.6 (+0.5) |
Only in component B
CUDA
DLSS
ray_tracing
In both
ReBAR
FPS in games (1080p)
| Game | GeForce RTX 3050 | GeForce RTX 3070 Ti | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Assassin's Creed Mirage | 55 FPS | 102 FPS | 85.5% (B) |
| Baldur's Gate 3 | 45 FPS | 95 FPS | 111.1% (B) |
| Battlefield 5 | 93 FPS | 130 FPS | 39.8% (B) |
| CS:GO | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 170 FPS | 220 FPS | 29.4% (B) |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 66 FPS | 129 FPS | 95.5% (B) |
| Cyberpunk 2077 1.6 | 46 FPS | 65 FPS | 41.3% (B) |
| Dota 2 | 118 FPS | 146 FPS | 23.7% (B) |
| F1 2021 | 105 FPS | 139 FPS | 32.4% (B) |
| F1 22 | 86 FPS | 157 FPS | 82.6% (B) |
| F1 23 | 87 FPS | 178 FPS | 104.6% (B) |
| Far Cry 5 | 68 FPS | 138 FPS | 102.9% (B) |
| Final Fantasy XV Benchmark | 44 FPS | 50 FPS | 13.6% (B) |
| Fortnite | 110 FPS | 180 FPS | 63.6% (B) |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 90 FPS | 160 FPS | 77.8% (B) |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 87 FPS | 210 FPS | 141.4% (B) |
| GTA V | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| GTA V | 95 FPS | 80 FPS | +18.8% (A) |
| Metro Exodus | 49 FPS | 95 FPS | 93.9% (B) |
| Overwatch | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| PUBG | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 50 FPS | 110 FPS | 120% (B) |
| Returnal | 34 FPS | 103 FPS | 202.9% (B) |
| The Witcher 3 | 81 FPS | 188 FPS | 132.1% (B) |
| The Witcher 3 | 71 FPS | 140 FPS | 97.2% (B) |
| Tiny Tina's Wonderlands | 56 FPS | 115 FPS | 105.4% (B) |
| Valorant | 150 FPS | 230 FPS | 53.3% (B) |
| X-Plane 11.11 | 62 FPS | 52 FPS | +19.2% (A) |
Specs from public sources (PassMark, Geekbench). FPS measured at 1080p medium settings.
Based on the comparison:
GeForce RTX 3070 Ti wins 20 of the comparable criteria.
The choice depends on your use case.
🤔 How to choose
Universal advice for any use case.
- Reliability vs price: reliability (median 50) ↔ price (median 385.1).
- Weight vs CPU: mobility (median 48) ↔ overall performance (median 49.8).
- Upgradeability vs battery: upgradability (median 50) ↔ battery life (median 2.8).