Component comparison
GeForce RTX 3050 vs GeForce RTX 5070
GeForce RTX 3050 vs GeForce RTX 5070 — detailed GPU comparison: performance, gaming FPS, specifications.
Advantages
A
GeForce RTX 3050
- + Die size (mm²) (+63 mm²)
B
GeForce RTX 5070
- + Release year (+4)
- + VRAM (GB) (+4 GB)
- + Memory clock (MHz) (+500 MHz)
- + Bandwidth (GB/s) (+480 GB/s)
- + Memory bus (bit) (+64 bit)
- + TGP / TDP (W) (+25 W)
- + Lithography (nm) (-4 nm)
- + Transistors (M) (+22,400M)
- + CUDA cores (+4096)
- + TMUs (+128)
- + ROPs (+48)
- + RT cores (+32)
- + Tensor cores (+128)
- + FP32 performance (TFLOPS) (+25.37 TFLOPS)
- + Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) (+158.02 GPixel/s)
- + Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) (+396.35 GTexel/s)
- + Energy efficiency (+4.3)
- + PassMark (overall) (+7197)
- + 3DMark Fire Strike (+23000)
- + Normalized score (+6.5)
Detailed spec comparison
| Spec |
Component A
GeForce RTX 3050
|
Component B
GeForce RTX 5070
|
|---|---|---|
| Release year | 2021 | 2025 (+4) |
| VRAM (GB) | 4 GB | 8 GB (+4 GB) |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR7 |
| Memory clock (MHz) | 1500 MHz | 2000 MHz (+500 MHz) |
| Bandwidth (GB/s) | 192 GB/s | 672 GB/s (+480 GB/s) |
| Memory bus (bit) | 128 bit | 192 bit (+64 bit) |
| TGP / TDP (W) | 75 W | 100 W (+25 W) |
| Lithography (nm) | 8 nm | 4 nm (-4 nm) |
| Transistors (M) | 8,700M | 31,100M (+22,400M) |
| Die size (mm²) | 200 mm² (+63 mm²) | 263 mm² |
| Base clock (MHz) | 1065 MHz | — |
| Boost clock (MHz) | 1343 MHz | — |
| CUDA cores | 2,048 | 6,144 (+4096) |
| TMUs | 64 | 192 (+128) |
| ROPs | 32 | 80 (+48) |
| RT cores | 16 | 48 (+32) |
| Tensor cores | 64 | 192 (+128) |
| FP32 performance (TFLOPS) | 5.50 TFLOPS | 30.87 TFLOPS (+25.37 TFLOPS) |
| Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) | 42.98 GPixel/s | 201.00 GPixel/s (+158.02 GPixel/s) |
| Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) | 85.95 GTexel/s | 482.30 GTexel/s (+396.35 GTexel/s) |
| Energy efficiency | 17.0 | 21.3 (+4.3) |
| PassMark (overall) | 11,878 | 19,075 (+7197) |
| 3DMark Time Spy | 4,497 | — |
| 3DMark Fire Strike | 11,949 | 34,949 (+23000) |
| Geekbench OpenCL | 63,465 | — |
| Geekbench Vulkan | 62,164 | — |
| Normalized score | 63.1 | 69.6 (+6.5) |
Only in component B
CUDA
DLSS
ray_tracing
In both
ReBAR
FPS in games (1080p)
| Game | GeForce RTX 3050 | GeForce RTX 5070 | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Battlefield 5 | 93 FPS | 180 FPS | 93.5% (B) |
| CS:GO | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 170 FPS | 300 FPS | 76.5% (B) |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 66 FPS | 170 FPS | 157.6% (B) |
| Far Cry 5 | 68 FPS | 322 FPS | 373.5% (B) |
| Fortnite | 110 FPS | 300 FPS | 172.7% (B) |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 90 FPS | 270 FPS | 200% (B) |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 87 FPS | 329 FPS | 278.2% (B) |
| GTA V | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Metro Exodus | 49 FPS | 170 FPS | 246.9% (B) |
| Overwatch | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| PUBG | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 50 FPS | 210 FPS | 320% (B) |
| The Witcher 3 | 81 FPS | 436 FPS | 438.3% (B) |
| Valorant | 150 FPS | 400 FPS | 166.7% (B) |
Specs from public sources (PassMark, Geekbench). FPS measured at 1080p medium settings.
Based on the comparison:
GeForce RTX 5070 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).