NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile vs AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile and AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile
- Videocard is newer: launch date 5 year(s) 6 month(s) later
- Around 29% higher core clock speed: 1455 MHz vs 1130 MHz
- Around 13% higher boost clock speed: 1755 MHz vs 1560 MHz
- Around 11% higher pipelines: 2560 vs 2304
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 4 nm vs 7 nm
- Around 30% lower typical power consumption: 115 Watt vs 150 Watt
- Around 33% higher memory clock speed: 2000 MHz, 16 Gbps effective vs 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective)
- Around 7% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 14441 vs 13490
- Around 15% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 74538 vs 64726
- Around 7% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1788 vs 1669
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 2023 vs 21 Jan 2020 |
Core clock speed | 1455 MHz vs 1130 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1755 MHz vs 1560 MHz |
Pipelines | 2560 vs 2304 |
Manufacturing process technology | 4 nm vs 7 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 115 Watt vs 150 Watt |
Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz, 16 Gbps effective vs 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective) |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 14441 vs 13490 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 74538 vs 64726 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1788 vs 1669 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT
- Around 60% higher texture fill rate: 224.6 GTexel/s vs 140.4 GTexel/s
- Around 38% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 871 vs 630
Specifications (specs) | |
Texture fill rate | 224.6 GTexel/s vs 140.4 GTexel/s |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 871 vs 630 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile
GPU 2: AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile | AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G2D Mark | 630 | 871 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 14441 | 13490 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 74538 | 64726 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1788 | 1669 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 207.909 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3560.776 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 20.486 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 148.938 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1111.648 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 13621 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3719 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 13621 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3719 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile | AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Ada Lovelace | RDNA 1.0 |
Code name | AD107 | Navi 10 XLE |
Launch date | 2023 | 21 Jan 2020 |
Place in performance rating | 167 | 210 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $279 | |
Type | Desktop, Laptop | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1755 MHz | 1560 MHz |
Core clock speed | 1455 MHz | 1130 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 4 nm | 7 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 140.4 GFLOPS (1:64) | 449.3 GFLOPS |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 8.986 TFLOPS (1:1) | 14.38 TFLOPS |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 8.986 TFLOPS | 7.188 TFLOPS |
Pipelines | 2560 | 2304 |
Pixel fill rate | 56.16 GPixel/s | 99.84 GPixel/s |
Texture fill rate | 140.4 GTexel/s | 224.6 GTexel/s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 115 Watt | 150 Watt |
Compute units | 36 | |
Transistor count | 10300 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort |
DisplayPort count | 3 | |
DisplayPort support | ||
HDMI | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Form factor | IGP | |
Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
Supplementary power connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |
Length | 10.5 inches (267 mm) | |
Recommended system power (PSU) | 350 Watt | |
Width | Dual-slot | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 |
OpenCL | 3.0 | 2.0 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Shader Model | 6.7 | 6.5 |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | 6 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 192.0 GB/s | 288.0 GB/s |
Memory bus width | 96 bit | 192 bit |
Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz, 16 Gbps effective | 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective) |
Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |