GeForce RTX 3050 Laptop GPU vs GeForce RTX 4050 Laptop GPU: specs and benchmark comparison
Short verdict
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Laptop GPU leads in every scenario with comparable benchmarks: rendering and compute. This does not imply an advantage in tasks without benchmarks.
Compare with AIRendering and compute
B +146.8%NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Laptop GPU leads in this scenario (up to 146.8% in comparable benchmarks).
No comparable benchmarks yet: gaming: rasterization, gaming: ray tracing, power efficiency.
Advantages
Only measured and rated values: a noticeable benchmark gap and specs where more is better.
Where GeForce RTX 3050 Laptop GPU is better0
No advantages found in our data.
Where GeForce RTX 4050 Laptop GPU is better1
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0 126.3% faster2,599 samples/min vs 1,148 samples/min
Benchmarks
Results are compared within one benchmark, one version and the same conditions. Laptop chip results depend on the laptop model: its maker sets the power limit and cooling.
- B ahead by 126.3%
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0
GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) · samples/min, higher is better
GeForce RTX 3050 Laptop GPU1,148.5 samples/minGeForce RTX 4050 Laptop GPU2,599 samples/minPosition among tested models (67, OptiX)
A · 1,148B · 2,59905,00010,00015,000Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, samples/min. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Laptop GPU is ahead by 126.3% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Laptop GPU
1,148.5 samples/min · community measurement, sample 191 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 191 submissions (7 outliers excluded), interquartile range 994.91–1201.19; submissions 2025-07-17 to 2026-06-03; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Laptop GPU
2,599 samples/min · community measurement, sample 373 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 373 submissions (30 outliers excluded), interquartile range 2464.65–2683.34; submissions 2025-07-17 to 2026-11-13; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Cycles render in Blender Benchmark. Median of the sum of samples per minute over three scenes after removing outliers.
Other comparable benchmarks (9)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 1,157.3 | 2,549.3 | B +120.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 1,122.4 | 2,447.6 | B +118.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 5.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 980 | 2,418.7 | B +146.8% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 1,307.8 | 2,915.8 | B +123% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 1,326.6 | 2,894 | B +118.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 1,150.6 | 2,643.1 | B +129.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 1,184.9 | 2,648.1 | B +123.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 1,115.1 | 2,518.8 | B +125.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 1,145.3 | 2,596.9 | B +126.7% |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Reference results (38)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 75.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 77.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 49.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 46.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 343.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 153.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 165.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 95.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (CUDA) | 285.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 196.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 482.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 216.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | 4,335.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 313.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 553.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 647.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 740.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 599.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 720.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 730.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 688.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 469 | 1,572.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 539.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 723.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 516.8 | 1,429.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 690.5 | 1,397.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 1,261.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 1,244.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.2GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 1,123.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 1,237.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 1,244.3 | 2,373.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 1,230.2 | 2,852 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 1,203.7 | 2,817.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 837.5 | 2,332.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 1,101.7 | 2,304.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 1,074.3 | 2,840.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 1,491.3 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 1,443 | no pair |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Specifications
Chip maker values. The laptop maker sets the power limit and clocks in each laptop.
| Specification | A · GeForce RTX 3050 Laptop GPU | B · GeForce RTX 4050 Laptop GPU | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chip | |||
| GPU chip | GA107 | no data | no data for B |
| Architecture | Ampere | Ada Lovelace | differs |
| Shader unitsShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture. | no data | 2,560 (CUDA cores) | no data for A |
| Clocks | |||
| Boost clockClocks of different architectures do not reflect performance directly. For laptop chips, the clock depends on the laptop’s power limit. | 990–1,740 MHz | 1,605–2,370 MHz | not directly comparable |
| Memory | |||
| Video memory | no data | 6 GB | no data for A |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 | equal |
| Memory bus | no data | 96 bit | no data for A |
| Power and dimensions | |||
| Board powerTGP (NVIDIA) and TBP (AMD/Intel) are calculated differently; higher is not better. For laptops, the chip maker sets the range and the laptop maker picks the value, so the same chip behaves differently in different laptops. | no data | 35–115 W (graphics subsystem power) | no data for A |
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 | differs |
Chip
GPU chip
AGA107
Bno data
no data for BArchitecture
AAmpere
BAda Lovelace
differsShader units
Ano data
B2,560 (CUDA cores)
no data for AShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture.
Clocks
Boost clock
A990–1,740 MHz
B1,605–2,370 MHz
not directly comparableClocks of different architectures do not reflect performance directly. For laptop chips, the clock depends on the laptop’s power limit.
Memory
Video memory
Ano data
B6 GB
no data for AMemory type
AGDDR6
BGDDR6
equalMemory bus
Ano data
B96 bit
no data for A
Power and dimensions
Board power
Ano data
B35–115 W (graphics subsystem power)
no data for ATGP (NVIDIA) and TBP (AMD/Intel) are calculated differently; higher is not better. For laptops, the chip maker sets the range and the laptop maker picks the value, so the same chip behaves differently in different laptops.
Interface
APCIe 4.0 x8
BPCIe 4.0
differs
“More” does not always mean “better”: higher power draw or size is a system requirement, not an advantage (such bars are dimmed).
Compare with AI
An AI model reviews the specs and benchmarks of this pair and gives a plain-language verdict on who each model suits.
Questions and answers
Which PCIe interface do the cards use?
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Laptop GPU: PCIe 4.0 x8. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Laptop GPU: PCIe 4.0.
Which is faster: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Laptop GPU or NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Laptop GPU?
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Laptop GPU leads in every scenario with comparable benchmarks: rendering and compute. This does not imply an advantage in tasks without benchmarks.
See also
Data sources (3)
- NVIDIA — specifications of NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Laptop GPU, specifications of NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Laptop GPUchecked November 7, 2026
- Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation) — benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.92, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.93.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.0.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.2.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.3.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.6.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.3.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.1.2, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.3.0checked November 14, 2026
- Wikipedia (English) — release date and launch pricechecked November 14, 2026
How we compare: methodology. Where the data comes from: sources.