AMD Steam Deck OLED GPU vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Steam Deck OLED GPU compare to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile in raw compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile delivers significantly higher raw compute. Its FP32 throughput is 4.813 TFLOPS, while the AMD Steam Deck OLED GPU provides 1.638 TFLOPS, making the NVIDIA part roughly three times faster in peak single-precision work.

Q: What is the memory capacity and type for each GPU?

A: The AMD Steam Deck OLED GPU has 16 GB of LPDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding 176.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on the same 128-bit bus, achieving 192.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile, built on Samsung's 8 nm process, has a transistor density of 43.5M per mm². The AMD Steam Deck OLED GPU, fabricated on TSMC's 6 nm node, has a density of 18.3M per mm².

Q: What are the benchmark scores for the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile?

A: The recorded data shows an average benchmark score of 8746, with a Passmark G3D score of 11664 and a Geekbench OpenCL score of 52998. Its percentile rank among all GPUs is 44.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel rate?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile has a pixel rate of 42.98 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 75.21 GTexel/s. The AMD Steam Deck OLED GPU has a pixel rate of 25.60 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 51.20 GTexel/s.

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

A: The AMD Steam Deck OLED GPU is rated at 15 W TDP. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile is rated at 45 W TDP, three times the power envelope of the AMD part.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent distinct architectural generations and design philosophies. The AMD Steam Deck OLED GPU uses the RDNA 2.0 architecture on the Sephiroth chip, fabricated by TSMC on a 6 nm process. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile uses the Ampere architecture on the GA106 chip, built by Samsung on an 8 nm process. These foundry and node differences lead to substantially different transistor counts: the AMD chip contains 2,400 million transistors on a 131 mm² die, while the NVIDIA chip contains 12,000 million transistors on a 276 mm² die. This translates to a transistor density of 18.3M per mm² for AMD versus 43.5M per mm² for NVIDIA.

The compute resources differ sharply. The AMD GPU has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, 16 ROPs, and 8 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA GPU has 1792 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, 32 ROPs, 14 ray tracing cores, and 56 tensor cores. NVIDIA's tensor cores provide dedicated hardware for AI-accelerated workloads, a feature absent from the AMD part. The FP16 throughput also reveals a design split: AMD achieves 3.277 TFLOPS FP16 via a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32, while NVIDIA reaches 4.813 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, indicating a different approach to mixed-precision execution.

Memory architecture differs as well. The AMD part uses LPDDR5 system memory, which is typical for a unified-memory console design. The NVIDIA part uses dedicated GDDR6 memory. Both use a 128-bit bus, but the memory clocks differ: AMD runs at 1375 MHz with 11 Gbps effective speed, while NVIDIA runs at 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective speed. The NVIDIA part achieves higher bandwidth at 192.0 GB/s versus 176.0 GB/s for AMD, despite having one quarter of the capacity.

API support shows both parts support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The NVIDIA GPU supports Vulkan 1.4, while the AMD GPU supports Vulkan 1.3. The NVIDIA part uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, whereas the AMD part lists no bus interface in the database. Physical design differs too: the AMD GPU ships as a 298 mm long, 117 mm high, 49 mm wide unit with a single USB Type-C display output, while the NVIDIA part is an IGP with no dedicated power connectors and display outputs that are portable device dependent.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between these two GPUs, and the AMD part has no recorded benchmark scores, average score, or rival comparisons. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile, however, has a complete benchmark profile. Its Passmark G3D score of 11664 places it at the 44th percentile among all GPUs. Its average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 8746.

The NVIDIA part's nearest rivals in the database provide context for its performance tier. The GeForce GTX 460 v2 scores 8743, a delta of 0%. The Quadro P2200 scores 8686, which is 0.7% lower. The Radeon R9 M265X scores 8851, which is 1.2% higher. The Radeon Pro WX 5100 scores 8863, which is 1.3% higher. These tight deltas show the RTX 3050 A Mobile sits in a narrow performance band, within roughly 1.3% of any of these comparable parts.

Breaking down the NVIDIA benchmark suite, the Passmark DirectX 9 score of 152 stands out as the strongest legacy DirectX result. The DirectX 11 score is 94, DirectX 10 is 61, and DirectX 12 is 55. The Passmark G2D score of 526 and GPU compute score of 4419 round out the profile. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 52998 provides an additional cross-platform compute reference. The AMD Steam Deck OLED GPU has no comparable figures in the database, so no direct numerical comparison between the two is possible from recorded measurements.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show the following differences between the two GPUs:

• Process node: AMD uses 6 nm TSMC; NVIDIA uses 8 nm Samsung.
• Transistors: AMD has 2,400 million; NVIDIA has 12,000 million.
• Die size: AMD is 131 mm²; NVIDIA is 276 mm².
• Transistor density: AMD is 18.3M per mm²; NVIDIA is 43.5M per mm².
• Base clock: AMD runs at 1000 MHz; NVIDIA runs at 1065 MHz.
• Boost clock: AMD runs at 1600 MHz; NVIDIA runs at 1343 MHz.
• Memory clock: AMD runs at 1375 MHz (11 Gbps effective); NVIDIA runs at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective).
• Memory size: AMD has 16 GB LPDDR5; NVIDIA has 4 GB GDDR6.
• Memory bandwidth: AMD achieves 176.0 GB/s; NVIDIA achieves 192.0 GB/s.
• Shading units: AMD has 512; NVIDIA has 1792.
• Texture mapping units: AMD has 32; NVIDIA has 56.
• ROPs: AMD has 16; NVIDIA has 32.
• Ray tracing cores: AMD has 8; NVIDIA has 14.
• Tensor cores: AMD has none; NVIDIA has 56.
• Pixel rate: AMD is 25.60 GPixel/s; NVIDIA is 42.98 GPixel/s.
• Texture rate: AMD is 51.20 GTexel/s; NVIDIA is 75.21 GTexel/s.
• FP32 performance: AMD is 1.638 TFLOPS; NVIDIA is 4.813 TFLOPS.
• FP16 performance: AMD is 3.277 TFLOPS (2:1); NVIDIA is 4.813 TFLOPS (1:1).
• TDP: AMD is 15 W; NVIDIA is 45 W.
• Vulkan support: AMD supports 1.3; NVIDIA supports 1.4.
• Bus interface: AMD lists none; NVIDIA uses PCIe 4.0 x8.
• Display outputs: AMD has 1x USB Type-C; NVIDIA is portable device dependent.
• Production status: AMD is active; NVIDIA is end-of-life.
• Release date: AMD released on 2023-11-08; NVIDIA released on 2023-12-31.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Steam Deck OLED GPU wins on power efficiency and memory capacity. Its 15 W TDP is one third of the NVIDIA part's 45 W, making it suitable for low-power, handheld or embedded deployments. The 16 GB LPDDR5 memory capacity provides four times the memory of the NVIDIA part, which matters for workloads that need large working sets rather than peak throughput. Its 6 nm TSMC process yields a smaller die and lower transistor count, which aligns with a compact, integrated design.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile wins on raw performance across nearly every compute metric. Its FP32 throughput of 4.813 TFLOPS is nearly three times that of the AMD part. Its pixel rate of 42.98 GPixel/s exceeds AMD's 25.60 GPixel/s by roughly 68%. Its texture rate of 75.21 GTexel/s exceeds AMD's 51.20 GTexel/s by roughly 47%. The NVIDIA part also has more shading units, TMUs, ROPs, ray tracing cores, and the only tensor cores in this comparison. Its memory bandwidth of 192.0 GB/s is higher despite the smaller capacity. The NVIDIA part's recorded benchmark scores, with an average of 8746 and a Passmark G3D score of 11664, confirm its measurable performance presence, whereas the AMD part has no recorded benchmark data.

The use cases split cleanly. The AMD GPU serves scenarios where power draw, memory capacity, and compact physical dimensions dominate, such as a handheld console with a 15 W envelope and 16 GB unified memory. The NVIDIA GPU serves scenarios where peak compute, rasterization throughput, and ray tracing capability are the priorities, such as a laptop GPU with a 45 W envelope and dedicated GDDR6 memory.

The Verdict

The data indicates two different design targets. The AMD Steam Deck OLED GPU is a low-power, high-capacity part: 15 W TDP, 16 GB LPDDR5, and 1.638 TFLOPS FP32. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile is a higher-performance, higher-power part: 45 W TDP, 4 GB GDDR6, and 4.813 TFLOPS FP32. The NVIDIA GPU delivers approximately 2.9 times the FP32 throughput, a 68% higher pixel rate, a 47% higher texture rate, and includes tensor cores and 14 ray tracing cores versus 8 for AMD. Its recorded benchmarks place it at the 44th percentile among all GPUs, with an average score of 8746 and nearest rivals within 1.3% on either side.

The AMD part, at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, so its measured performance cannot be compared directly. Its advantages are structural: four times the memory capacity, one third the TDP, a smaller die, and a more advanced 6 nm process node. The NVIDIA part is end-of-life and was released on 2023-12-31, while the AMD part remains active with a release date of 2023-11-08.

For workloads that require peak throughput, ray tracing hardware, or tensor core acceleration, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile is the clear choice based on the recorded specifications. For workloads that require minimal power draw, maximum memory capacity, or a compact integrated form factor, the AMD Steam Deck OLED GPU is the appropriate selection. The two parts do not compete in the same performance class; they occupy complementary positions in the database's performance and power spectrum.