Component comparison

GeForce RTX 3050 vs GeForce RTX 4090

GeForce RTX 3050 vs GeForce RTX 4090 — detailed GPU comparison: performance, gaming FPS, specifications.

Advantages

A GeForce RTX 3050
  • + Die size (mm²) (+409 mm²)
B GeForce RTX 4090
  • + Release year (+2)
  • + VRAM (GB) (+12 GB)
  • + Memory clock (MHz) (+750 MHz)
  • + Bandwidth (GB/s) (+842 GB/s)
  • + Memory bus (bit) (+256 bit)
  • + TGP / TDP (W) (+45 W)
  • + Lithography (nm) (-4 nm)
  • + Transistors (M) (+67,600M)
  • + CUDA cores (+14336)
  • + TMUs (+448)
  • + ROPs (+144)
  • + RT cores (+112)
  • + Tensor cores (+448)
  • + FP32 performance (TFLOPS) (+77.08 TFLOPS)
  • + Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) (+400.52 GPixel/s)
  • + Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) (+1204.05 GTexel/s)
  • + Energy efficiency (+24.9)
  • + PassMark (overall) (+15169)
  • + 3DMark Time Spy (+16754)
  • + 3DMark Fire Strike (+34242)
  • + Normalized score (+11.9)

Detailed spec comparison

Spec Component A
GeForce RTX 3050
 Component B
GeForce RTX 4090
Release year 2021 2023 (+2)
VRAM (GB) 4 GB 16 GB (+12 GB)
Memory type GDDR6 GDDR6
Memory clock (MHz) 1500 MHz 2250 MHz (+750 MHz)
Bandwidth (GB/s) 192 GB/s 1034 GB/s (+842 GB/s)
Memory bus (bit) 128 bit 384 bit (+256 bit)
TGP / TDP (W) 75 W 120 W (+45 W)
Lithography (nm) 8 nm 4 nm (-4 nm)
Transistors (M) 8,700M 76,300M (+67,600M)
Die size (mm²) 200 mm² (+409 mm²) 609 mm²
Base clock (MHz) 1065 MHz —
Boost clock (MHz) 1343 MHz —
CUDA cores 2,048 16,384 (+14336)
TMUs 64 512 (+448)
ROPs 32 176 (+144)
RT cores 16 128 (+112)
Tensor cores 64 512 (+448)
FP32 performance (TFLOPS) 5.50 TFLOPS 82.58 TFLOPS (+77.08 TFLOPS)
Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) 42.98 GPixel/s 443.50 GPixel/s (+400.52 GPixel/s)
Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) 85.95 GTexel/s 1290.00 GTexel/s (+1204.05 GTexel/s)
Energy efficiency 17.0 41.9 (+24.9)
PassMark (overall) 11,878 27,047 (+15169)
3DMark Time Spy 4,497 21,251 (+16754)
3DMark Fire Strike 11,949 46,191 (+34242)
Geekbench OpenCL 63,465 —
Geekbench Vulkan 62,164 —
Normalized score 63.1 75.0 (+11.9)

Only in component B

CUDA DLSS ray_tracing

In both

ReBAR

FPS in games (1080p)

Game GeForce RTX 3050 GeForce RTX 4090 Delta
Assassin's Creed Mirage 55 FPS 195 FPS 254.5% (B)
Avatar Frontiers of Pandora 32 FPS 114 FPS 256.3% (B)
Baldur's Gate 3 45 FPS 123 FPS 173.3% (B)
Battlefield 5 93 FPS 170 FPS 82.8% (B)
CS:GO 240 FPS 240 FPS ≈
Counter-Strike 2 170 FPS 300 FPS 76.5% (B)
Cyberpunk 2077 66 FPS 147 FPS 122.7% (B)
Cyberpunk 2077 1.6 46 FPS 98 FPS 113% (B)
Dota 2 118 FPS 199 FPS 68.6% (B)
F1 2021 105 FPS 276 FPS 162.9% (B)
F1 22 86 FPS 199 FPS 131.4% (B)
F1 23 87 FPS 152 FPS 74.7% (B)
Far Cry 5 68 FPS 173 FPS 154.4% (B)
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark 44 FPS 122 FPS 177.3% (B)
Fortnite 110 FPS 300 FPS 172.7% (B)
Forza Horizon 4 90 FPS 250 FPS 177.8% (B)
Forza Horizon 5 87 FPS 281 FPS 223% (B)
GTA V 140 FPS 140 FPS ≈
GTA V 95 FPS 154 FPS 62.1% (B)
Metro Exodus 49 FPS 156 FPS 218.4% (B)
Overwatch 240 FPS 240 FPS ≈
PUBG 140 FPS 140 FPS ≈
Resident Evil 4 Remake 50 FPS 218 FPS 336% (B)
Returnal 34 FPS 159 FPS 367.6% (B)
The Witcher 3 81 FPS 394 FPS 386.4% (B)
The Witcher 3 71 FPS 290 FPS 308.5% (B)
Tiny Tina's Wonderlands 56 FPS 168 FPS 200% (B)
Valorant 150 FPS 350 FPS 133.3% (B)
X-Plane 11.11 62 FPS 78 FPS 25.8% (B)

Specs from public sources (PassMark, Geekbench). FPS measured at 1080p medium settings.

Based on the comparison: GeForce RTX 4090 wins 21 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).
All reviews