AMD Radeon R5 M335 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data leaves no ambiguity: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti wins both head-to-head benchmark comparisons by decisive margins. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 1050 Ti scores 18,129 against the AMD Radeon R5 M335’s 4,745, a 73.8% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the GTX 1050 Ti posts 10,001 versus 4,758 for the R5 M335, a 52.4% lead. These are not close contests; the NVIDIA part more than triples the AMD part in OpenCL and more than doubles it in Vulkan.

The gap is consistent with the broader database averages. The GTX 1050 Ti carries an average benchmark score of 4,193, while the R5 M335 averages 4,752. That average, however, is skewed by the fact that the GTX 1050 Ti has a much larger benchmark portfolio, including lower-scoring DirectX tests that drag its mean down. Looking at the shared workloads, the NVIDIA card is categorically faster. The OpenCL result alone shows a delta of 13,384 points, which dwarfs the entire R5 M335’s score. The Vulkan result shows a delta of 5,243 points, again exceeding the AMD part’s total output.

The percentile data reinforces this hierarchy. The R5 M335 sits at the 28th percentile among all GPUs, while the GTX 1050 Ti sits at the 25th percentile. These are close percentile rankings, but they reflect different benchmark pools. The R5 M335’s percentile is derived from only two tests, both of which are compute-focused. The GTX 1050 Ti’s percentile spans eleven tests, including legacy DirectX workloads where it scores very low (e.g., 26 in DirectX 12, 31 in DirectX 10). In shared modern APIs, the GTX 1050 Ti is overwhelmingly ahead.

The nearest rivals for each card provide context. The R5 M335’s closest competitor is the AMD Radeon R8 M445DX, which averages 4,727, a 0.5% difference. The NVIDIA Quadro P400 sits 1.5% behind at 4,684. The GTX 1050 Ti’s closest rival is the AMD Radeon R5 M330, averaging 4,170, a 0.6% gap. These narrow deltas among low-end parts highlight how clustered the bottom tier is, but the head-to-head data cuts through that noise: the GTX 1050 Ti is in a different performance class.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti wins with a score of 18,129, which is 73.8% higher than the AMD Radeon R5 M335’s 4,745.

Q: Which GPU wins in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti wins with a score of 10,001, which is 52.4% higher than the AMD Radeon R5 M335’s 4,758.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each card?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M335 averages 4,752 across its two recorded tests. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti averages 4,193 across its eleven recorded tests.

Q: How do the two cards compare in terms of overall GPU percentile ranking?

A: The R5 M335 ranks at the 28th percentile among all GPUs, while the GTX 1050 Ti ranks at the 25th percentile.

Q: What are the closest rivals to each card based on average score?

A: The R5 M335’s nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R8 M445DX (4,727, 0.5% behind), while the GTX 1050 Ti’s nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R5 M330 (4,170, 0.6% behind).

Q: Does the R5 M335 win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. The database records zero wins for the AMD Radeon R5 M335 and two wins for the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti in the head-to-head comparisons.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: for any workload represented in the shared benchmarks, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti is the superior choice. Its OpenCL and Vulkan scores are 73.8% and 52.4% higher, respectively, than the AMD Radeon R5 M335. The GTX 1050 Ti also brings a much broader benchmark profile, with eleven recorded tests spanning DirectX 9 through 12, Metal, OpenCL, Vulkan, and compute workloads. The R5 M335 has only two recorded tests, both compute-oriented.

The GTX 1050 Ti is the pick for anyone needing actual graphics performance, even in legacy APIs. Its PassMark DirectX 9 score of 104, DirectX 11 score of 45, and DirectX 12 score of 26 are low in absolute terms, but they exist at all, whereas the R5 M335 has no recorded DirectX scores. The GTX 1050 Ti’s PassMark G3D score of 6,340 and GPU compute score of 2,652 further demonstrate its versatility. The R5 M335’s only advantage is its average benchmark score, which is inflated by having just two data points.

The R5 M335 is an end-of-life part from 2015, built on a 28 nm process with 690 million transistors. The GTX 1050 Ti, released a year later in 2016, uses a 14 nm process with 3,300 million transistors. The architectural gap is reflected in every measurable metric. If the choice is between these two, the GTX 1050 Ti wins on every shared benchmark, every memory specification, and every compute metric.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ on nearly every recorded specification. The AMD Radeon R5 M335 uses a 28 nm process from TSMC, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti uses a 14 nm process from Samsung. The R5 M335 has 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, while the GTX 1050 Ti has 3,300 million transistors on a 132 mm² die. Transistor density is 12.3M per mm² for the AMD part versus 25.0M per mm² for the NVIDIA part.

Memory configurations are starkly different. The R5 M335 has 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 1050 Ti has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 112.1 GB/s. That is nearly eight times the bandwidth. The R5 M335’s memory clock is 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), while the GTX 1050 Ti’s memory clock is 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective).

Compute resources also diverge sharply. The R5 M335 has 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 raster output units. The GTX 1050 Ti has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The GTX 1050 Ti has a base clock of 1291 MHz and a boost clock of 1392 MHz; the R5 M335 has no recorded base or boost clock.

The R5 M335 has a TDP that is not recorded, while the GTX 1050 Ti has a TDP of 75 W. The GTX 1050 Ti is dual-slot and measures 145 mm in length and 111 mm in height, while the R5 M335 has no recorded dimensions. The bus interface differs: PCIe 3.0 x8 for the AMD part, PCIe 3.0 x16 for the NVIDIA part. Display outputs are portable-device-dependent for the R5 M335, while the GTX 1050 Ti offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Architecture Differences

The R5 M335 is built on AMD’s GCN 1.0 architecture, using the Exo chip. The GTX 1050 Ti uses NVIDIA’s Pascal architecture, based on the GP107 chip. These are fundamentally different designs from different generations. The R5 M335 belongs to the Gem System (R5 M300) generation, while the GTX 1050 Ti belongs to the GeForce 10-series.

The process node difference is significant: 28 nm versus 14 nm. That allows the GTX 1050 Ti to pack 3,300 million transistors into 132 mm², versus 690 million in 56 mm² for the R5 M335. The transistor density nearly doubles, from 12.3M per mm² to 25.0M per mm², which explains the GTX 1050 Ti’s higher shading unit count (768 versus 320) and larger memory bus (128-bit versus 64-bit).

The R5 M335 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The GTX 1050 Ti supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The DirectX feature level difference (11_1 versus 12_1) indicates that the GTX 1050 Ti supports more modern DirectX 12 features. The R5 M335 has no recorded fp16 capability, while the GTX 1050 Ti has fp16 performance of 33.41 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio).

The GTX 1050 Ti has a pixel rate of 44.54 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 66.82 GTexel/s, versus 8.240 GPixel/s and 20.60 GTexel/s for the R5 M335. The fp32 performance gap is also large: 2.138 TFLOPS for the GTX 1050 Ti versus 659.2 GFLOPS for the R5 M335. The GTX 1050 Ti has a suggested PSU of 250 W and no power connectors, while the R5 M335 also has no power connectors but no suggested PSU either.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti wins every shared benchmark. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 73.8% higher. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 52.4% higher. The GTX 1050 Ti also covers a wider range of workloads, with recorded scores in PassMark DirectX 9 (104), DirectX 10 (31), DirectX 11 (45), DirectX 12 (26), G2D (651), G3D (6,340), GPU compute (2,652), Geekbench Metal (7,834), and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 (305). The R5 M335 has no scores in any of these tests.

The R5 M335’s only claim to a win is its higher average benchmark score (4,752 versus 4,193) and its slightly higher percentile ranking (28th versus 25th). Those figures are artifacts of the benchmark pool: two compute-heavy tests for the AMD part, eleven mixed tests for the NVIDIA part. In any direct comparison of identical workloads, the GTX 1050 Ti wins outright.

For use cases involving modern graphics APIs, the GTX 1050 Ti is the clear choice. Its Vulkan score of 10,001 and OpenCL score of 18,129 indicate strong compute and cross-platform graphics capability. The R5 M335’s scores of 4,758 and 4,745 are roughly half to a quarter of the NVIDIA part’s results. For legacy DirectX workloads, the GTX 1050 Ti has recorded scores; the R5 M335 has none, meaning it has no proven capability in those APIs.

For memory bandwidth-sensitive workloads, the GTX 1050 Ti’s 112.1 GB/s is a massive advantage over the R5 M335’s 14.40 GB/s. For raw shader throughput, the GTX 1050 Ti’s 768 shading units and 2.138 TFLOPS more than triple the R5 M335’s 320 units and 659.2 GFLOPS. The GTX 1050 Ti also has four times the ROPs (32 versus 8) and more than twice the TMUs (48 versus 20).

The R5 M335 is a portable-device-dependent part with no recorded TDP, no dimensions, and no launch MSRP. The GTX 1050 Ti is a dual-slot card with a 75 W TDP, a launch MSRP of 139 USD, and a suggested PSU of 250 W. For any desktop or laptop application where the GTX 1050 Ti can physically fit, the data shows it is the superior performer. The R5 M335 remains viable only in scenarios where the GTX 1050 Ti cannot be installed, and even then, its compute scores are far lower.