AMD Radeon R9 370X vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM Comparison

The AMD Radeon R9 370X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM sit at nearly the same overall performance tier, yet the data reveals they achieve that status through completely different means. The R9 370X, a 2015-era GCN part, posts an average benchmark score of 15,862, while the RTX 3050 OEM, a 2022 Ampere design, averages 15,199. That is a difference of only 663 points, or roughly 4.4%, despite the two cards being separated by more than six years of architecture evolution. The RTX 3050 OEM holds a 57th percentile rank versus the R9 370X’s 58th, placing them adjacent in the overall GPU distribution. The real story emerges in the head-to-head tests, where the NVIDIA card wins both available comparisons by staggering margins, and in the architectural chasm that explains why.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture for different buyers. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM is the choice for anyone running modern, compute-heavy workloads or Vulkan-based applications. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 60,740 more than doubles the R9 370X’s 25,893, and its Vulkan score of 57,103 is over six times higher than the AMD card’s 9,018. If your software leverages these APIs, the RTX 3050 OEM is not just better—it is in a different league.

The AMD Radeon R9 370X, however, still holds relevance for legacy scenarios. Its higher average benchmark score (15,862 vs 15,199) suggests that in older, DirectX-based workloads or in mixed test suites, it edges out the RTX 3050 OEM. The R9 370X also carries a 58th percentile ranking, one point higher than the RTX 3050 OEM’s 57th, indicating its overall standing in the broader GPU hierarchy is marginally better. For users with older games or applications that predate Vulkan’s dominance, the R9 370X can still deliver usable performance.

Yet, the future-proofing argument strongly favors NVIDIA. The RTX 3050 OEM offers 8 GB of GDDR6 memory versus 2 GB of GDDR5, 18 ray-tracing cores, 72 tensor cores, and DirectX 12 Ultimate support. The R9 370X has none of those features. The RTX 3050 OEM also draws less power (130 W TDP vs 180 W) and requires a 300 W PSU versus 450 W. The verdict is straightforward: pick the RTX 3050 OEM for modern software and longevity, pick the R9 370X only if you have a strict legacy workload and need its slight average-score edge.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two is generational. The R9 370X uses the Trinidad chip built on GCN 1.0 architecture and a 28 nm TSMC process. It packs 2,800 million transistors on a 212 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.2M per mm². The RTX 3050 OEM uses the GA106 chip on Ampere architecture, fabricated on Samsung’s 8 nm node, with 12,000 million transistors across a 276 mm² die—a density of 43.5M per mm². That is over three times the transistor density, representing a fundamental shift in what can be packed into a given area.

Core counts diverge sharply. The R9 370X has 1,280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The RTX 3050 OEM has 2,304 shading units, 72 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. While the NVIDIA card has fewer TMUs, its shading unit advantage is massive—80% more. The RTX 3050 OEM also adds 18 ray-tracing cores and 72 tensor cores, hardware that simply does not exist on the R9 370X. Clock speeds tell a similar story: the R9 370X runs at 980 MHz base and 1030 MHz boost, while the RTX 3050 OEM runs at 1515 MHz base and 1755 MHz boost. That is a 54% higher base clock and a 70% higher boost clock.

Memory architecture is another chasm. The R9 370X uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 179.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 3050 OEM uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, but achieves 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth thanks to faster memory (14 Gbps effective vs 5.6 Gbps effective). The NVIDIA card has four times the capacity and 25% more bandwidth despite half the bus width. The R9 370X supports PCIe 3.0 x16, while the RTX 3050 OEM uses PCIe 4.0 x8. In terms of API support, the R9 370X tops out at DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the RTX 3050 OEM supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two available head-to-head results are decisive and one-sided. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 3050 OEM scores 60,740 against the R9 370X’s 25,893, a delta of -57.4% from the AMD card’s perspective. That means the NVIDIA card is roughly 134% faster in this test—more than double the compute throughput. The R9 370X’s FP32 rating of 2.637 TFLOPS versus the RTX 3050 OEM’s 8.087 TFLOPS explains this gap, showing a 3-fold raw compute advantage for NVIDIA.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the results are even more lopsided. The RTX 3050 OEM scores 57,103, while the R9 370X manages only 9,018, a delta of -84.2%. The NVIDIA card is over six times faster in Vulkan. This is not a marginal win; it is a rout. The RTX 3050 OEM’s Vulkan 1.4 support versus the R9 370X’s Vulkan 1.2.170 likely contributes, but the raw hardware advantage—more shading units, higher clocks, and dedicated tensor cores—dominates the outcome.

The R9 370X does have one indirect claim to victory: its average benchmark score of 15,862 beats the RTX 3050 OEM’s 15,199. This average likely includes other tests where the AMD card performs relatively better, such as older DirectX paths or memory-bandwidth-sensitive workloads. However, the head-to-head data shows zero wins for the R9 370X and two for the RTX 3050 OEM. In the specific tests where both cards were measured under identical conditions, the R9 370X never comes out ahead.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 370X has an average benchmark score of 15,862, whereas the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM averages 15,199. That gives the AMD card a 663-point edge, or roughly 4.4%.

Q: How much faster is the RTX 3050 OEM in OpenCL compute?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 3050 OEM scores 60,740 versus the R9 370X’s 25,893, a delta of -57.4% from the AMD card’s side, meaning the NVIDIA card is more than double the performance.

Q: Does the R9 370X win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. In the two head-to-head tests available (Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan), the RTX 3050 OEM wins both. The R9 370X records zero wins.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The R9 370X has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the RTX 3050 OEM has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory. That is a fourfold capacity increase for the NVIDIA card.

Q: Which card has better API support?

A: The RTX 3050 OEM supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the R9 370X supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA card is more modern in both APIs.

Q: What is the power draw comparison?

A: The R9 370X has a TDP of 180 W and suggests a 450 W PSU, while the RTX 3050 OEM has a TDP of 130 W and suggests a 300 W PSU. The NVIDIA card is more power-efficient.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3050 OEM wins decisively in modern compute and graphics APIs. Its OpenCL score of 60,740 versus 25,893 makes it the clear choice for GPU compute tasks like rendering, physics simulations, or machine learning inference. Its Vulkan score of 57,103 versus 9,018 means any Vulkan-based game or application will run dramatically better on the NVIDIA card. The 8 GB memory capacity allows it to handle larger textures and datasets that would exhaust the R9 370X’s 2 GB frame buffer. The presence of ray-tracing and tensor cores opens up features—DLSS, ray-traced effects—that the R9 370X cannot access at all.

The R9 370X’s victories are more subtle. Its higher average benchmark score (15,862 vs 15,199) suggests it performs better across a broad mix of unspecified tests, likely including legacy DirectX paths. Its 256-bit memory bus and 179.2 GB/s bandwidth, while lower in total bandwidth than the RTX 3050 OEM, may provide better efficiency in certain bandwidth-bound legacy scenarios. The R9 370X also has a higher percentile ranking (58th vs 57th), indicating its overall position in the GPU landscape is marginally stronger. For users running older DirectX 9/10/11 titles that do not benefit from the NVIDIA card’s newer features, the R9 370X may hold its own or even edge ahead.

The RTX 3050 OEM wins on efficiency metrics that matter for system builders: lower TDP (130 W vs 180 W), lower PSU requirement (300 W vs 450 W), and a single 8-pin power connector versus dual 6-pin connectors. The NVIDIA card is also physically longer (242 mm vs 221 mm), but both are dual-slot designs.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two cards, per the data:

• Chip: R9 370X uses Trinidad; RTX 3050 OEM uses GA106.
• Architecture: GCN 1.0 versus Ampere.
• Process node: 28 nm (TSMC) versus 8 nm (Samsung).
• Transistors: 2,800 million versus 12,000 million.
• Die size: 212 mm² versus 276 mm².
• Transistor density: 13.2M / mm² versus 43.5M / mm².
• Base clock: 980 MHz versus 1515 MHz.
• Boost clock: 1030 MHz versus 1755 MHz.
• Memory clock: 1400 MHz (5.6 Gbps effective) versus 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective).
• Memory size: 2 GB versus 8 GB.
• Memory type: GDDR5 versus GDDR6.
• Memory bus: 256 bit versus 128 bit.
• Memory bandwidth: 179.2 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s.
• Shading units: 1280 versus 2304.
• TMUs: 80 versus 72.
• RT cores: None versus 18.
• Tensor cores: None versus 72.
• Pixel rate: 32.96 GPixel/s versus 56.16 GPixel/s.
• Texture rate: 82.40 GTexel/s versus 126.4 GTexel/s.
• FP32: 2.637 TFLOPS versus 8.087 TFLOPS.
• FP16: Not listed versus 8.087 TFLOPS (1:1).
• TDP: 180 W versus 130 W.
• Power connectors: 2x 6-pin versus 1x 8-pin.
• Suggested PSU: 450 W versus 300 W.
• Bus interface: PCIe 3.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x8.
• Display outputs: 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2 versus 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.
• DirectX support: 12 (11_1) versus 12 Ultimate (12_2).
• Vulkan support: 1.2.170 versus 1.4.
• Release date: 2015-08-26 versus 2022-01-03.
• Launch MSRP: 199 USD for the R9 370X; no MSRP listed for the RTX 3050 OEM.
• Length: 221 mm versus 242 mm.
• Height: 111 mm for both, but listed separately as 4.4 inches each.