AMD Radeon 740M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM Comparison

# Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data presents a clear split between these two graphics solutions. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM wins both head-to-head tests, taking the OpenCL and Vulkan workloads with substantial margins. The AMD Radeon 740M, an integrated graphics processor, does not claim a single victory in the available measurements. This is not a close contest in raw compute performance. The RTX 3050 OEM delivers 497.1% higher OpenCL scores and 266.8% higher Vulkan scores. Those deltas place the discrete NVIDIA part in a different performance tier entirely.

However, the use-case split is not simply about which GPU is faster. The Radeon 740M occupies a fundamentally different market position. It is an IGP with a 45 W TDP, no power connectors, and motherboard-dependent display outputs. It fits into compact systems where a discrete card cannot be installed. The RTX 3050 OEM, by contrast, is a dual-slot card with a 130 W TDP, a single 8-pin connector, and a 300 W suggested power supply. It demands physical space and power delivery. Therefore, the win condition for each product depends on the system design. In a full desktop with expansion slots and adequate power, the RTX 3050 OEM is the clear choice based on every recorded score. In an ultra-compact or low-power build, the Radeon 740M is the only option that fits, and its performance, while far lower, exists where no discrete GPU can be placed.

The benchmark wins also reflect the architectural intent. The RTX 3050 OEM has 2304 shading units, 72 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, alongside 18 ray tracing cores and 72 tensor cores. The Radeon 740M has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, with 4 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores at all. The geometric difference in execution resources directly explains the massive score gaps. Where the RTX 3050 OEM can process complex shader workloads in parallel across its large array, the Radeon 740M must serialize more of the work through a smaller pipeline. For gaming at high resolutions, content creation, or any GPU-accelerated compute task, the RTX 3050 OEM is the winner in every measured scenario. For basic display output, light media playback, and productivity workloads that do not stress the GPU, the Radeon 740M serves adequately, though its scores suggest even those tasks will run noticeably slower.

# Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from completely different design philosophies. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM uses the GA106 chip built on Ampere architecture, fabricated on Samsung's 8 nm process node. The die measures 276 mm² and packs 12,000 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 43.5 million per square millimeter. The AMD Radeon 740M uses the Phoenix2 chip based on RDNA 3.0 architecture, manufactured on TSMC's 4 nm node. That die is just 137 mm² but contains 20,900 million transistors, resulting in a density of 152.6 million per square millimeter. The Radeon 740M is a much denser, more modern implementation, but it is designed for low-power integrated use, not peak throughput.

Clock behavior diverges sharply. The RTX 3050 OEM has a base clock of 1515 MHz and a boost clock of 1755 MHz, with memory running at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The Radeon 740M has an 800 MHz base clock and a 2800 MHz boost clock. The AMD part boosts much higher, but it has far fewer execution units to feed. The high boost clock does not compensate for the 9x difference in shading unit count. The RTX 3050 OEM's memory subsystem is a dedicated 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon 740M uses system shared memory, with its bus width and bandwidth listed as system dependent. This is a critical architectural distinction: the discrete card has guaranteed, high-bandwidth local memory, while the integrated GPU competes with the CPU for memory access, making its performance highly variable depending on the host system's RAM configuration and speed.

Feature sets also differ. The RTX 3050 OEM includes 18 ray tracing cores and 72 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI-based features like DLSS. The Radeon 740M has 4 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API-level compatibility is identical. But the underlying capabilities for ray tracing and machine learning workloads are dramatically different. The RTX 3050 OEM's tensor cores give it a dedicated path for neural network inference, which the Radeon 740M lacks entirely. For any workload that leverages tensor operations, the NVIDIA part has a structural advantage that no driver optimization can overcome.

The power delivery and physical design reflect the architectural choices. The RTX 3050 OEM is rated at 130 W, requires a dual-slot cooling solution, and draws power from a single 8-pin connector. It is 242 mm long and 112 mm tall. The Radeon 740M is an IGP with a 45 W TDP, no power connectors, and no physical dimensions listed because it is embedded on the motherboard. The NVIDIA part is a mature discrete GPU from the GeForce 30-series, released in January 2022 and now end-of-life. The AMD part is from the Navi III IGP (Phoenix) generation, released in January 2024 and still active in production. The Radeon 740M is the newer product but targets a completely different segment.

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two available head-to-head tests are Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. Both are synthetic compute workloads that measure raw GPU throughput, and both show overwhelming wins for the RTX 3050 OEM.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 3050 OEM scores 60740, while the Radeon 740M scores 10172. That is a delta of 497.1% in favor of the NVIDIA card. To put this in context, the RTX 3050 OEM's nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon RX 7600 with an average score of 15171 (0.2% lower), the AMD Radeon 680M with 15270 (0.5% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 with 15283 (0.5% higher), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 with 15290 (0.6% higher). The Radeon 740M's nearest rivals are the AMD FirePro W5100 at 12847 (0.2% lower), the AMD Radeon Pro 455 at 12831 (0.3% lower), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 at 12830 (0.3% lower), and the AMD Radeon RX 580 at 12928 (0.4% higher). The RTX 3050 OEM sits in the 57th percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon 740M sits in the 53rd percentile. The percentile gap is modest, but the absolute score gap is enormous, which indicates that the Radeon 740M's percentile is inflated by the large number of very weak integrated and legacy GPUs in the database.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 3050 OEM scores 57103, and the Radeon 740M scores 15568. The delta is 266.8% in favor of NVIDIA. The Vulkan gap, while still massive, is smaller than the OpenCL gap. This suggests that the Radeon 740M's RDNA 3.0 architecture handles Vulkan's lower-level API more efficiently relative to its OpenCL performance. However, even with that relative efficiency, the RTX 3050 OEM remains nearly four times faster in Vulkan. The RTX 3050 OEM's Vulkan score is 57103, which is remarkably close to its OpenCL score of 60740, indicating consistent performance across API boundaries. The Radeon 740M shows a larger API sensitivity: its Vulkan score of 15568 is about 53% higher than its OpenCL score of 10172. This indicates that the integrated GPU benefits more from the lower-overhead Vulkan interface, but the fundamental resource deficit remains insurmountable.

The database also records additional benchmarks for the RTX 3050 OEM that have no equivalents for the Radeon 740M. These include Passmark G3D with a score of 11857, Passmark G2D at 973, Passmark GPU Compute at 5779, and Passmark DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 scores of 137, 61, 86, and 58 respectively. The Radeon 740M has no recorded data for these tests, so a direct comparison is impossible. The overall average benchmark score for the RTX 3050 OEM is 15199, while the Radeon 740M's average is 12870. That is an 18% gap in average score, which is significant but far smaller than the head-to-head deltas, because the average includes different test suites with different weighting.

# FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in raw compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM is faster in both recorded head-to-head tests. It scores 60740 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 10172 for the Radeon 740M, a 497.1% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 57103 versus 15568, a 266.8% advantage.

Q: Why does the Radeon 740M have a higher boost clock but lower performance?

A: The Radeon 740M boosts to 2800 MHz versus 1755 MHz for the RTX 3050 OEM, but it has only 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The RTX 3050 OEM has 2304 shading units, 72 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The higher clock cannot compensate for the 9x difference in execution resources.

Q: Can the Radeon 740M be used for gaming?

A: The Radeon 740M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so modern games will run. However, its performance is far below the RTX 3050 OEM, and its memory bandwidth is system dependent, meaning actual gaming performance will vary based on the host system's RAM configuration.

Q: Does the Radeon 740M support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the Radeon 740M has 4 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which includes ray tracing requirements. However, the RTX 3050 OEM has 18 ray tracing cores and 72 tensor cores, providing substantially more dedicated hardware for ray tracing and AI workloads.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The RTX 3050 OEM has a 130 W TDP and requires a 300 W suggested power supply, while the Radeon 740M has a 45 W TDP and no power connectors. The Radeon 740M is designed for low-power integrated use, while the RTX 3050 OEM is a discrete card requiring a power supply connection.

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The RTX 3050 OEM has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon 740M uses system shared memory, and its bandwidth is listed as system dependent, so no fixed figure can be stated.

# Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two products, based on recorded data:

• Chip: GA106 (NVIDIA) versus Phoenix2 (AMD)
• Architecture: Ampere versus RDNA 3.0
• Generation: GeForce 30 versus Navi III IGP (Phoenix)
• Process Node: 8 nm versus 4 nm
• Foundry: Samsung versus TSMC
• Transistors: 12,000 million versus 20,900 million
• Die Size: 276 mm² versus 137 mm²
• Transistor Density: 43.5M / mm² versus 152.6M / mm²
• Base Clock: 1515 MHz versus 800 MHz
• Boost Clock: 1755 MHz versus 2800 MHz
• Memory Clock: 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) versus system shared
• Memory Size: 8 GB GDDR6 versus system shared
• Memory Bus Width: 128 bit versus system shared
• Memory Bandwidth: 224.0 GB/s versus system dependent
• Shading Units: 2304 versus 256
• TMUs: 72 versus 16
• ROPs: 32 versus 8
• Ray Tracing Cores: 18 versus 4
• Tensor Cores: 72 versus none
• Pixel Rate: 56.16 GPixel/s versus 22.40 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 126.4 GTexel/s versus 44.80 GTexel/s
• FP32 Performance: 8.087 TFLOPS versus 2.867 TFLOPS
• FP16 Performance: 8.087 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 2.867 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 130 W versus 45 W
• Slot Width: Dual-slot versus IGP
• Power Connectors: 1x 8-pin versus none
• Suggested PSU: 300 W versus not applicable
• Display Outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a versus motherboard dependent
• Dimensions: 242 mm length, 112 mm height versus not applicable (IGP)
• Production Status: End-of-life versus active
• Release Date: January 2022 versus January 2024
• Predecessor: GeForce 20 versus Navi II IGP
• Successor: GeForce 40 versus Navi III IGP
• Average Benchmark Score: 15199 versus 12870
• Percentile vs All GPUs: 57th versus 53rd
• Head-to-Head Wins: 2 versus 0

The RTX 3050 OEM is a larger, more power-hungry, and more performant discrete GPU. The Radeon 740M is a smaller, more efficient, and less performant integrated GPU. Their only shared specifications are the PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, DirectX 12 Ultimate support, OpenGL 4.6 support, and Vulkan 1.4 support. Everything else, from the physical package to the compute resources, is fundamentally different.