AMD Instinct MI350X vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database shows no directly recorded head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the AMD Instinct MI350X and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile. The MI350X has an average benchmark score of 0, with no individual test entries, while the RTX 4050 Mobile carries a full suite of measured results. This absence of overlapping data means any direct numerical comparison between the two is impossible from the recorded measurements alone.

For the RTX 4050 Mobile, the strongest recorded result appears in Geekbench Vulkan with a score of 75235, followed closely by Geekbench OpenCL at 74748. The Passmark G3D result of 14423 and Passmark GPU Compute result of 5947 provide additional context. The weakest recorded scores for the RTX 4050 Mobile are in Passmark DirectX 12 at 61, Passmark DirectX 10 at 79, and Passmark DirectX 11 at 130.

The MI350X, by comparison, has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. Its percentile ranking of 50 places it at the midpoint of all GPUs, but this ranking is based on an average score of 0, which reflects missing data rather than measured performance. The RTX 4050 Mobile holds a percentile ranking of 63, placing it above the midpoint and ahead of the MI350X in percentile terms, though this comparison is distorted by the MI350X's lack of recorded results.

The RTX 4050 Mobile's nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Radeon RX 6600 with an average score of 19036 and a delta of 0.1 percent, the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 at 19030 with a delta of 0.1 percent, the NVIDIA Tesla K20m at 19089 with a delta of negative 0.2 percent, and the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation at 18954 with a delta of 0.5 percent. These deltas show the RTX 4050 Mobile performing within half a percent of all four rivals, indicating tight clustering in this performance band.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4050 Mobile wins in every category where recorded data exists, because the MI350X has no benchmark entries. The RTX 4050 Mobile's Geekbench Vulkan score of 75235 and OpenCL score of 74748 show strong performance in compute-oriented workloads. Its Passmark G3D score of 14423 indicates solid general 3D rendering capability, while the Passmark GPU Compute score of 5947 demonstrates additional compute throughput.

The MI350X's only recorded advantage is in raw specification scale. It carries 16384 shading units, 1024 texture mapping units, 288 GB of HBM3e memory, and an 8192-bit memory bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4050 Mobile uses 2560 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, 48 ROPs, 6 GB of GDDR6 memory, and a 96-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MI350X's FP32 throughput of 72.09 TFLOPS dwarfs the RTX 4050 Mobile's 8.986 TFLOPS. These figures suggest the MI350X would dominate in memory-bandwidth-bound and massive-parallelism workloads, but no benchmark scores confirm this.

The RTX 4050 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, giving it a clear API feature advantage. The MI350X lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan support. The RTX 4050 Mobile also includes 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores, features entirely absent from the MI350X's specification sheet.

The Verdict

The data supports selecting the RTX 4050 Mobile for any workload requiring recorded, verified performance metrics. It has nine separate benchmark entries, an average score of 19049, and a percentile ranking of 63. The MI350X cannot be recommended on the basis of measured performance because no benchmark data exists for it in the database.

The MI350X should be considered only for its architectural capabilities as expressed in its specification sheet. Its 288 GB memory capacity, 8.19 TB/s bandwidth, and 72.09 TFLOPS FP32 throughput point toward extreme compute density. However, these specifications come with a 1000 W TDP and an OAM Module slot width, making it a fundamentally different class of hardware from the RTX 4050 Mobile's 50 W IGP design.

For a laptop-oriented GPU with confirmed scores, the RTX 4050 Mobile is the only defensible choice from the recorded data. For a datacenter-scale accelerator with unmatched memory and compute specifications but no verified results, the MI350X remains an unproven quantity in benchmark terms.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The RTX 4050 Mobile has an average benchmark score of 19049, while the MI350X has an average benchmark score of 0.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference between the two?

A: The MI350X uses 288 GB of HBM3e memory with an 8192-bit bus and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4050 Mobile uses 6 GB of GDDR6 memory with a 96-bit bus and 192.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do their FP32 compute capabilities compare?

A: The MI350X delivers 72.09 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the RTX 4050 Mobile delivers 8.986 TFLOPS.

Q: Does the MI350X support DirectX or Vulkan?

A: No, the MI350X lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. The RTX 4050 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What are the nearest rivals to the RTX 4050 Mobile in the database?

A: The nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 6600 at 19036, NVIDIA Quadro K6000 at 19030, NVIDIA Tesla K20m at 19089, and NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation at 18954, all within 0.5 percent of the RTX 4050 Mobile's score.

Q: What are the power requirements for each?

A: The MI350X has a TDP of 1000 W and a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The RTX 4050 Mobile has a TDP of 50 W and no suggested PSU listed.

Architecture Differences

The MI350X uses the CDNA 4.0 architecture on a 3 nm TSMC process, built around the MI350 256CU chip. It contains 185,000 million transistors on a die size of 2380 mm². The RTX 4050 Mobile uses the Ada Lovelace architecture on a 5 nm TSMC process, built around the AD107 chip with 18,900 million transistors on a die size of 159 mm². The transistor density differs substantially: the MI350X packs 77.7 million transistors per mm², while the RTX 4050 Mobile reaches 118.9 million per mm².

The MI350X has no ROPs recorded, a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, and a texture rate of 2,252.8 GTexel/s. The RTX 4050 Mobile has 48 ROPs, a pixel rate of 84.24 GPixel/s, and a texture rate of 140.4 GTexel/s. The MI350X lacks ray tracing cores and tensor cores, while the RTX 4050 Mobile includes 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores. Both support FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32.

The MI350X uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, while the RTX 4050 Mobile uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The MI350X has no display outputs, while the RTX 4050 Mobile's outputs are described as portable device dependent. The MI350X ships as an OAM Module with no power connectors and no suggested PSU beyond the 1400 W figure. The RTX 4050 Mobile is an IGP with no power connectors and no suggested PSU listed.

Specification Differences

The MI350X has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz, while the RTX 4050 Mobile has a base clock of 1455 MHz and a boost clock of 1755 MHz. Both list memory clocks at 2000 MHz, though the effective rates differ: 8 Gbps for the MI350X and 16 Gbps for the RTX 4050 Mobile.

Memory size differs by a factor of 48: 288 GB versus 6 GB. Memory type differs between HBM3e and GDDR6. Bus width differs from 8192 bit to 96 bit. Bandwidth differs from 8.19 TB/s to 192.0 GB/s. Shading units number 16384 versus 2560. TMUs number 1024 versus 80. FP32 and FP16 performance stand at 72.09 TFLOPS versus 8.986 TFLOPS.

TDP differs from 1000 W for the MI350X to 50 W for the RTX 4050 Mobile. The MI350X measures 102 mm in length and 165 mm in width, while the RTX 4050 Mobile has no recorded dimensions. The MI350X's release date is 2025-06-11, while the RTX 4050 Mobile's release date is 2023-01-02. The MI350X's predecessor is listed as Radeon Instinct, while the RTX 4050 Mobile's predecessor is GeForce 30 Mobile and its successor is GeForce 50 Mobile. The RTX 4050 Mobile has an active production status, while the MI350X has no production status recorded.