Component comparison
GeForce RTX 5060 vs GeForce GTX 1050
GeForce RTX 5060 vs GeForce GTX 1050 — detailed GPU comparison: performance, gaming FPS, specifications.
Advantages
A
GeForce RTX 5060
- + Release year (+8)
- + VRAM (GB) (+6 GB)
- + Bandwidth (GB/s) (+336 GB/s)
- + Lithography (nm) (-9 nm)
- + Transistors (M) (+18,600M)
- + CUDA cores (+3072)
- + TMUs (+72)
- + ROPs (+24)
- + FP32 performance (TFLOPS) (+16.96 TFLOPS)
- + Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) (+73.34 GPixel/s)
- + Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) (+241.40 GTexel/s)
- + Energy efficiency (+58.2)
- + PassMark (overall) (+11701)
- + 3DMark Fire Strike (+25298)
- + Normalized score (+18.9)
B
GeForce GTX 1050
- + Memory clock (MHz) (+5508 MHz)
- + TGP / TDP (W) (+30 W)
- + Die size (mm²) (+49 mm²)
Detailed spec comparison
| Spec |
Component A
GeForce RTX 5060
|
Component B
GeForce GTX 1050
|
|---|---|---|
| Release year | 2025 (+8) | 2017 |
| VRAM (GB) | 8 GB (+6 GB) | 2 GB |
| Memory type | GDDR7 | GDDR5 |
| Memory clock (MHz) | 1500 MHz | 7008 MHz (+5508 MHz) |
| Bandwidth (GB/s) | 448 GB/s (+336 GB/s) | 112 GB/s |
| Memory bus (bit) | 128 bit | 128 bit |
| TGP / TDP (W) | 45 W | 75 W (+30 W) |
| Lithography (nm) | 5 nm (-9 nm) | 14 nm |
| Transistors (M) | 21,900M (+18,600M) | 3,300M |
| Die size (mm²) | 181 mm² | 132 mm² (+49 mm²) |
| Base clock (MHz) | — | — |
| Boost clock (MHz) | — | — |
| CUDA cores | 3,840 (+3072) | 768 |
| TMUs | 120 (+72) | 48 |
| ROPs | 48 (+24) | 24 |
| RT cores | 30 | — |
| Tensor cores | 120 | — |
| FP32 performance (TFLOPS) | 19.18 TFLOPS (+16.96 TFLOPS) | 2.21 TFLOPS |
| Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) | 119.90 GPixel/s (+73.34 GPixel/s) | 46.56 GPixel/s |
| Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) | 299.60 GTexel/s (+241.40 GTexel/s) | 58.20 GTexel/s |
| Energy efficiency | 69.2 (+58.2) | 11.0 |
| PassMark (overall) | 16,749 (+11701) | 5,048 |
| 3DMark Time Spy | — | — |
| 3DMark Fire Strike | 31,366 (+25298) | 6,068 |
| Geekbench OpenCL | — | 17,429 |
| Geekbench Vulkan | — | 15,766 |
| Normalized score | 50.3 (+18.9) | 31.3 |
Only in component A
DLSS
ReBAR
ray_tracing
In both
CUDA
FPS in games (1080p)
| Game | GeForce RTX 5060 | GeForce GTX 1050 | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Battlefield 5 | 130 FPS | 51 FPS | +154.9% (A) |
| CS:GO | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 220 FPS | 65 FPS | +238.5% (A) |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 95 FPS | 24 FPS | +295.8% (A) |
| Escape from Tarkov | 120 FPS | 54 FPS | +122.2% (A) |
| Far Cry 5 | 130 FPS | 39 FPS | +233.3% (A) |
| Fortnite | 170 FPS | 132 FPS | +28.8% (A) |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 150 FPS | 55 FPS | +172.7% (A) |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 255 FPS | 35 FPS | +628.6% (A) |
| GTA V | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Metro Exodus | 95 FPS | 19 FPS | +400% (A) |
| Overwatch | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| PUBG | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 110 FPS | 24 FPS | +358.3% (A) |
| The Witcher 3 | 140 FPS | 39 FPS | +259% (A) |
| Valorant | 230 FPS | 100 FPS | +130% (A) |
Specs from public sources (PassMark, Geekbench). FPS measured at 1080p medium settings.
Based on the comparison:
GeForce RTX 5060 wins 15 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).