AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher boost clock speed?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM boosts to 2600 MHz, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 boosts to 1762 MHz.

Q: How do the two cards compare in memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM delivers 144.0 GB/s over a 64-bit bus with GDDR6 at 18 Gbps effective. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 provides 96.00 GB/s over the same 64-bit bus width with GDDR6 at 12 Gbps effective.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM, built on TSMC's 4 nm node, has a density of 149.2M transistors per mm². The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010, fabricated on Samsung's 8 nm node, has a density of 43.5M per mm².

Q: What is the thermal design power for each card?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM has a TDP of 92 W, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 has a TDP of 50 W.

Q: Which card has more ray tracing cores?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM has 16 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 has 6 ray tracing cores.

Q: How does the RTX 4010's benchmark score compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RTX 4010 scores 2893 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. This places it 0.5% behind the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB, 0.6% behind the RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF, and 0.7% behind the RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 represent fundamentally different architectural generations and design philosophies. The RX 9050 OEM is based on the Navi 44 chip using RDNA 4.0 architecture, which belongs to the Navi IV (RX 9000) generation. It is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with 29,700 million transistors packed into a 199 mm² die. The RTX 4010 uses the GA107 chip with Ampere architecture from the GeForce 40 generation, manufactured on Samsung's 8 nm node, containing 8,700 million transistors across a 200 mm² die.

The transistor density difference is stark: 149.2M transistors per mm² for the RX 9050 OEM versus 43.5M per mm² for the RTX 4010. This reflects the two-generation process gap between the cards, with AMD fitting over three times more transistors per unit area despite a nearly identical die size.

The compute configuration differs substantially. The RX 9050 OEM has 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The RTX 4010 has 768 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This gives the AMD card a 33% advantage in shader count and a 4x advantage in TMU count. The AMD part also includes 16 ray tracing cores, while NVIDIA integrates 6 RT cores alongside 24 tensor cores, which the AMD card lacks entirely.

Memory architectures are similar in capacity and bus width, with both cards using 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit interface, but the clock speeds diverge. The RX 9050 OEM runs memory at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), yielding 144.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 4010 operates memory at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective), producing 96.00 GB/s. The AMD card therefore has 50% more memory bandwidth.

The API support is identical across both cards: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both are listed as Active production parts. The RX 9050 OEM uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the RTX 4010 uses PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs also differ, with AMD providing 1x HDMI 2.1b and 2x DisplayPort 2.1a, while NVIDIA offers 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM dominates in raw computational throughput. Its FP32 peak of 10.65 TFLOPS is nearly four times the RTX 4010's 2.706 TFLOPS. This advantage extends to pixel and texture processing: the RX 9050 OEM achieves 166.4 GPixel/s and 166.4 GTexel/s, versus 28.19 GPixel/s and 42.29 GTexel/s for the RTX 4010. The AMD card is the clear choice for workloads that scale with shader count, texture operations, or fill rate, such as high-resolution rendering or texture-heavy scenes.

The RTX 4010 has its own advantages in physical characteristics. With a 50 W TDP and no power connectors, it is a low-power, single-slot solution. The RX 9050 OEM requires a dual-slot cooler with a single 8-pin connector and draws 92 W. The NVIDIA card is also compact, measuring 163 mm (6.4 inches) in length and 69 mm (2.7 inches) in height, making it suitable for space-constrained builds. Both share a suggested PSU rating of 250 W.

The RTX 4010 includes 24 tensor cores, enabling AI-accelerated features that the RX 9050 OEM cannot match due to the absence of dedicated tensor hardware. For users prioritizing tensor-based workflows or low-profile installations, the NVIDIA card holds the advantage. For all pure graphics performance metrics, the AMD part wins decisively.

The RTX 4010's benchmark data shows it sitting at the 18th percentile among all GPUs, while the RX 9050 OEM sits at the 50th percentile, though no direct benchmark scores are recorded for the AMD card in the database. The RTX 4010's average benchmark score of 2893 places it in a tight cluster with the RTX 4060 Ti variants and the RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF, all within roughly one percent of each other.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 |

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

| Chip | Navi 44 | GA107 |

| Architecture | RDNA 4.0 | Ampere |

| Generation | Navi IV (RX 9000) | GeForce 40 |

| Process node | 4 nm (TSMC) | 8 nm (Samsung) |

| Transistors | 29,700 million | 8,700 million |

| Die size | 199 mm² | 200 mm² |

| Transistor density | 149.2M / mm² | 43.5M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1330 MHz | 1417 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2600 MHz | 1762 MHz |

| Game clock | 1920 MHz | Not specified |

| Memory clock | 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective | 1500 MHz, 12 Gbps effective |

| Memory bandwidth | 144.0 GB/s | 96.00 GB/s |

| Shading units | 1024 | 768 |

| TMUs | 64 | 24 |

| ROPs | 64 | 16 |

| RT cores | 16 | 6 |

| Tensor cores | Not specified | 24 |

| Pixel rate | 166.4 GPixel/s | 28.19 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 166.4 GTexel/s | 42.29 GTexel/s |

| FP32 performance | 10.65 TFLOPS | 2.706 TFLOPS |

| FP16 performance | 10.65 TFLOPS (1:1) | 2.706 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 92 W | 50 W |

| Slot width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

| Power connectors | 1x 8-pin | None |

| Bus interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 2x DisplayPort 2.1a | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Release date | 2026-07-27 | 2024-04-15 |

| Predecessor | Navi III | GeForce 30 |

| Successor | Not specified | GeForce 50 |

| Percentile vs all GPUs | 50 | 18 |

| Average benchmark score | Not recorded | 2893 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between these two GPUs, and the AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM has no recorded benchmark scores in its profile. The comparison therefore relies on the architectural specifications and the RTX 4010's single recorded benchmark result.

The RTX 4010 scores 2893 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. This score places it just below a group of significantly higher-tier NVIDIA cards: it trails the RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB by 0.5%, the RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF by 0.6%, and the RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB by 0.7%. It also sits 1% behind the Quadro P600. The narrow deltas, all under one percentage point, indicate that the RTX 4010 performs on par with these established mid-range cards in this specific test, despite its much lower shader count and clock speeds.

The RX 9050 OEM has no benchmark entries, so direct score comparisons cannot be made from the recorded data. However, the specification differences are instructive. The AMD card's FP32 throughput of 10.65 TFLOPS is roughly 3.9 times that of the RTX 4010. Its texture rate of 166.4 GTexel/s is approximately 3.9 times higher, and its pixel rate of 166.4 GPixel/s is roughly 5.9 times higher. These ratios suggest a substantial performance gap in favor of the AMD part for most graphics workloads.

The percentile rankings reinforce this picture. The RX 9050 OEM sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, meaning half of all recorded GPUs score lower. The RTX 4010 sits at the 18th percentile, indicating it outperforms fewer than one in five GPUs in the database. The difference in percentile rankings, 32 points, is consistent with the large architectural advantages held by the AMD card.

Clock speeds also favor AMD. The RX 9050 OEM has a boost clock of 2600 MHz, which is 47.6% higher than the RTX 4010's 1762 MHz boost. The base clocks are closer, with the RTX 4010 actually starting higher at 1417 MHz versus 1330 MHz for the AMD card, but the boost behavior favors AMD substantially. The memory clock difference is similarly large: 2250 MHz versus 1500 MHz, resulting in 18 Gbps effective versus 12 Gbps effective data rates.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear division of roles. The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM is the stronger graphics processor by nearly every measurable compute metric. It has more than double the shading units, nearly triple the TMUs, four times the ROPs, and delivers roughly four times the FP32 throughput. Its memory bandwidth is 50% higher, its boost clock is over 800 MHz higher, and its pixel and texture rates are multiples of the NVIDIA card's figures. For any application that stresses raw rasterization, texture fetching, or compute throughput, the RX 9050 OEM is the appropriate choice.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 occupies a different position. Its 50 W TDP, single-slot design, and lack of external power connectors make it a candidate for low-power or space-constrained systems. The inclusion of 24 tensor cores provides dedicated hardware for AI inference and tensor-based workloads, which the AMD card does not offer. Its compact dimensions, 163 mm length and 69 mm height, further support small-form-factor installations.

The RTX 4010's benchmark score of 2893 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, with deltas under 1% against the RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB, RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF, and RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB, indicates it performs competitively within its class. The RX 9050 OEM's percentile ranking of 50 versus the RTX 4010's 18 suggests the AMD card is positioned in a higher performance tier overall.

For users who need maximum graphics throughput, the RX 9050 OEM is the data-backed selection. For users who require minimal power draw, a single-slot footprint, or tensor core acceleration, the RTX 4010 is the only option with those characteristics. The two GPUs are not direct competitors in the traditional sense; they serve different segments, and the recorded specifications and benchmark results point to the AMD card as the higher-performing part in general-purpose graphics workloads.