AMD Radeon R9 M295X vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data places the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile clearly ahead of the AMD Radeon R9 M295X in the two common benchmark tests available for direct comparison. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA part scores 50038 against 22858 for the AMD part, a delta of 118.9 percent. This is more than double the raw score, indicating a substantial advantage in general-purpose compute workloads that utilize the OpenCL API. The lead narrows in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RTX 3050 Mobile scores 49051 versus 29091, a delta of 68.6 percent. While the gap is smaller in Vulkan, it remains decisive, with the NVIDIA GPU outperforming the older AMD architecture by more than two-thirds.

The broader database averages confirm this positioning. The RTX 3050 Mobile carries an average benchmark score of 33170, while the R9 M295X averages 28580. That difference of roughly 4590 points places the NVIDIA part in a higher performance tier overall. The percentile rankings reinforce the split: the RTX 3050 Mobile sits at the 78th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the R9 M295X sits at the 74th percentile. The head-to-head record is 2 wins for the RTX 3050 Mobile and 0 for the R9 M295X, with no test in the shared set favoring the AMD product.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each card provides additional context. The RTX 3050 Mobile's closest competitors by average score are the NVIDIA T550 Mobile at 33161 (a delta of 0 percent), the AMD Radeon Pro 570 at 33207 (a delta of -0.1 percent), the NVIDIA P104-100 at 32982 (a delta of 0.6 percent), and the NVIDIA T600 Mobile at 32849 (a delta of 1 percent). The RTX 3050 Mobile essentially trades blows with these cards, sitting within one percent of each. For the R9 M295X, the nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 at 28421 (a delta of 0.6 percent), the AMD Radeon RX 570 at 28766 (a delta of -0.6 percent), the AMD Radeon RX 6800M at 28874 (a delta of -1 percent), and the AMD Radeon RX 470 at 28996 (a delta of -1.4 percent). The R9 M295X is similarly clustered, but at a lower absolute performance level.

A notable point from the head-to-head data is the absence of a DirectX test in the shared set. The RTX 3050 Mobile has a recorded 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 421, but the R9 M295X has no corresponding entry in the database. Similarly, the R9 M295X has a Geekbench Metal score of 33790, which has no counterpart for the NVIDIA part. These platform-specific results do not factor into the direct comparison but are worth noting for users of specific APIs.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent different generations of design philosophy. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile uses the GA107 chip built on the Ampere architecture, fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. The AMD Radeon R9 M295X uses the Amethyst chip built on GCN 3.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The process node difference is stark: 8 nm versus 28 nm, which explains much of the efficiency and performance gap.

Transistor counts and die sizes tell a complementary story. The RTX 3050 Mobile packs 8,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 43.5 million per square millimeter. The R9 M295X contains 5,000 million transistors on a much larger 366 mm² die, giving a density of just 13.7 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA chip is smaller in physical area but holds nearly twice the transistor count, a direct consequence of the more advanced manufacturing process. The R9 M295X's larger die with fewer transistors reflects its older 28 nm node.

Memory subsystems differ in type and bandwidth. The RTX 3050 Mobile uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128 bit bus, delivering 192.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The R9 M295X uses 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a wider 256 bit bus, but delivers only 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Despite having half the bus width, the NVIDIA part achieves higher bandwidth thanks to faster memory clocks: 12 Gbps effective for the RTX 3050 Mobile versus 5 Gbps effective for the R9 M295X. The AMD card compensates for slower memory with a wider interface, but the net result favors NVIDIA.

Core configurations show a mixed picture. Both GPUs have 2048 shading units and 32 ROPs. The RTX 3050 Mobile has 64 TMUs, while the R9 M295X has 128 TMUs. This doubles the texture units on the AMD side, which is reflected in the texture rate: 85.95 GTexel/s for NVIDIA versus 92.54 GTexel/s for AMD. The AMD card wins on texture throughput, but the NVIDIA card wins decisively on pixel rate, 42.98 GPixel/s versus 23.14 GPixel/s, and on floating point performance, 5.501 TFLOPS versus 2.961 TFLOPS for FP32 and FP16.

The RTX 3050 Mobile also brings features the R9 M295X lacks entirely. It has 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads. The R9 M295X has no ray tracing or tensor cores, as its GCN 3.0 architecture predates those technologies. API support reflects this: the RTX 3050 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the R9 M295X supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Power and physical specifications differ sharply. The RTX 3050 Mobile has a TDP of 45 W and is an IGP form factor with no power connectors, designed to be integrated into a laptop motherboard. The R9 M295X has a TDP of 250 W and is an MXM module with a MXM-B (3.0) bus interface. The bus interface also differs: PCIe 4.0 x8 for NVIDIA versus MXM-B (3.0) for AMD. The NVIDIA card is a modern, power-efficient mobile solution, while the AMD card is a high-power, removable module from an earlier era.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3050 Mobile wins in most compute-heavy scenarios. Its FP32 performance of 5.501 TFLOPS is nearly double the R9 M295X's 2.961 TFLOPS, making it the stronger choice for general shader work, physics calculations, and any workload that relies on raw floating point throughput. The pixel rate advantage, 42.98 GPixel/s versus 23.14 GPixel/s, favors NVIDIA for fill-rate-bound tasks such as high-resolution rendering and post-processing effects. Memory bandwidth of 192.0 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s also favors NVIDIA, helping with texture streaming and data-intensive shaders.

The R9 M295X retains an edge in texture throughput. With 128 TMUs and a texture rate of 92.54 GTexel/s, it beats the RTX 3050 Mobile's 64 TMUs and 85.95 GTexel/s. This suggests the AMD card could hold its own in older games or workloads that are heavily texture-bound, where the extra texture units can be utilized. However, this advantage is narrow, about 7.7 percent, and is unlikely to overcome the NVIDIA card's substantial leads elsewhere.

The R9 M295X also has a wider memory bus at 256 bit versus 128 bit. While the RTX 3050 Mobile achieves higher bandwidth overall, a wider bus can be advantageous in certain access patterns that benefit from larger contiguous memory transactions. This is a theoretical benefit, not reflected in the benchmark scores, and the recorded data shows no test where the AMD card wins.

For ray tracing and AI workloads, the RTX 3050 Mobile is the only option of the two, as the R9 M295X has no ray tracing cores or tensor cores. Any application that leverages DirectX 12 Ultimate features, such as hardware ray tracing or variable rate shading, will require the NVIDIA card. The R9 M295X is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0) feature levels.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile outperforms the AMD Radeon R9 M295X in every shared benchmark, with deltas of 118.9 percent in OpenCL and 68.6 percent in Vulkan. The average benchmark score difference of 4590 points places the NVIDIA card in a higher performance tier, confirmed by the 78th versus 74th percentile rankings. The RTX 3050 Mobile also offers hardware ray tracing, tensor cores, and a more modern API feature set, none of which the R9 M295X provides.

For users choosing between these two, the RTX 3050 Mobile is the clear pick for modern gaming, compute workloads, and any application that benefits from ray tracing or AI acceleration. Its lower TDP of 45 W versus 250 W also makes it far more suitable for thin-and-light laptops, whereas the R9 M295X requires a larger chassis to accommodate its MXM module and power draw. The R9 M295X's only advantages are a higher texture rate and a wider memory bus, neither of which translates into a benchmark win in the database.

The R9 M295X may still be relevant for users with legacy systems that require an MXM module, or for workloads that are specifically optimized for AMD's GCN architecture and use the Metal API, where it scores 33790. However, for general performance and future-proofing, the RTX 3050 Mobile is the superior choice based on all recorded measurements.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile has an average benchmark score of 33170, while the AMD Radeon R9 M295X has an average of 28580.

Q: How large is the performance gap in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RTX 3050 Mobile scores 50038 versus 22858 for the R9 M295X, a delta of 118.9 percent.

Q: Does the R9 M295X have ray tracing support?

A: No, the R9 M295X has no ray tracing cores or tensor cores. The RTX 3050 Mobile has 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RTX 3050 Mobile delivers 192.0 GB/s over a 128 bit bus, while the R9 M295X delivers 160.0 GB/s over a 256 bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel rate?

A: The RTX 3050 Mobile has a pixel rate of 42.98 GPixel/s, compared to 23.14 GPixel/s for the R9 M295X.

Q: What are the DirectX version differences?

A: The RTX 3050 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the R9 M295X supports DirectX 12 (12_0).

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile | AMD Radeon R9 M295X |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | GA107 | Amethyst |

| Architecture | Ampere | GCN 3.0 |

| Process Node | 8 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | Samsung | TSMC |

| Transistors | 8,700 million | 5,000 million |

| Die Size | 200 mm² | 366 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 43.5M / mm² | 13.7M / mm² |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 192.0 GB/s | 160.0 GB/s |

| TMUs | 64 | 128 |

| RT Cores | 16 | None |

| Tensor Cores | 64 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 42.98 GPixel/s | 23.14 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 85.95 GTexel/s | 92.54 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 5.501 TFLOPS | 2.961 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 5.501 TFLOPS (1:1) | 2.961 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 45 W | 250 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | MXM Module |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | MXM-B (3.0) |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.2.170 |

| Release Date | 2021-05-10 | 2014-11-22 |

| Predecessor | GeForce 20 Mobile | Solar System |

| Successor | None | Polaris Mobile |