AMD Steam Machine GPU vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data presents a clear hierarchy between these two GPUs, though the comparison is constrained by the absence of direct head-to-head benchmark results. The AMD Steam Machine GPU, based on the Navi 33 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, occupies the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB sits at the 15th percentile. This percentile gap indicates that the AMD part is positioned substantially higher in overall performance distribution.

The RTX 3050 6 GB, with its 70 W TDP and 6 GB memory configuration, is an end-of-life product in the GeForce 30-series. Its average benchmark score of 2329 points places it near the NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M (2335 points, 0.3% higher), the NVIDIA Quadro P620 (2339 points, 0.4% higher), and the Intel HD Graphics 510 (2305 points, 1% lower). These nearest rivals suggest the RTX 3050 6 GB operates in a modest performance tier. The AMD Steam Machine GPU, by contrast, has no recorded benchmark scores or nearest rivals in the database, so its percentile ranking comes from its specification profile rather than measured results.

The data indicates the AMD Steam Machine GPU is the stronger option for users prioritizing raw compute throughput and memory bandwidth. Its FP32 performance of 17.56 TFLOPS, memory bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s, and 8 GB GDDR6 memory provide a substantial specification advantage. The NVIDIA part delivers 6.774 TFLOPS FP32, 168.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 6 GB memory. The AMD GPU is also a newer design, released in June 2026 versus February 2024 for the NVIDIA card, and remains in active production. The RTX 3050 6 GB is marked as end-of-life.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages. AMD uses the Navi 33 chip built on RDNA 3.0, codenamed Hotpink Bonefish, manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC. NVIDIA uses the GA107 chip built on Ampere, manufactured on an 8 nm process at Samsung. The process difference is notable: 6 nm versus 8 nm, which contributes to transistor density differences. AMD packs 13,300 million transistors into a 204 mm² die, yielding a density of 65.2 million transistors per square millimeter. NVIDIA packs 8,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, yielding 43.5 million per square millimeter. The AMD die is only 2 mm² larger but holds substantially more transistors.

The shading resources differ in configuration. The AMD GPU has 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The NVIDIA GPU has 2304 shading units, 72 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. NVIDIA fields more shading units, but AMD counters with more TMUs and double the ROPs. This structural difference influences where each GPU excels. The AMD part also includes 28 ray tracing cores, while NVIDIA includes 18 RT cores plus 72 tensor cores. Tensor cores are absent on the AMD side, a feature difference that matters for workloads using NVIDIA-specific tensor operations.

Clock speeds favor AMD decisively. The AMD GPU runs at a base clock of 1720 MHz, a game clock of 2250 MHz, and a boost clock of 2450 MHz. The NVIDIA GPU runs at a base of 1042 MHz and a boost of 1470 MHz, with no game clock specified. The memory clocks also differ: AMD memory operates at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed, while NVIDIA memory runs at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective speed. Both use GDDR6, but AMD's memory bus is 128-bit versus NVIDIA's 96-bit, producing 288.0 GB/s versus 168.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Steam Machine GPU wins on raw computational metrics. Its FP32 throughput of 17.56 TFLOPS is more than 2.5 times the NVIDIA figure of 6.774 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 274.4 GTexel/s dwarfs NVIDIA's 105.8 GTexel/s. Its pixel rate of 156.8 GPixel/s compares favorably to NVIDIA's 47.04 GPixel/s. These figures indicate AMD should dominate in fill-rate-bound scenarios and general compute workloads. The 8 GB memory capacity and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth also give AMD an edge in texture-heavy scenes and higher-resolution rendering, where memory capacity and bandwidth become limiting factors.

The NVIDIA RTX 3050 6 GB has its own advantages. Its 70 W TDP is significantly lower than AMD's 110 W, making it the more power-efficient option. It is a dual-slot card with a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the AMD card has no suggested PSU listed. NVIDIA also includes 72 tensor cores, which the AMD GPU lacks entirely. The RTX 3050 6 GB uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the AMD card has no bus interface listed in the data. In terms of display outputs, NVIDIA offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while AMD offers 1x HDMI 2.1a and 1x DisplayPort 2.1. The AMD card provides a newer DisplayPort version, but NVIDIA provides more total display outputs.

The NVIDIA card's physical dimensions differ substantially. It measures 242 mm in length and 112 mm in height. The AMD card measures 156 mm in length, 152 mm in height, and 162 mm in width. The AMD card is shorter but wider and taller, a compact form factor suited to the Steam Machine console context. Neither card requires external power connectors, and both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Steam Machine GPU delivers 17.56 TFLOPS FP32, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB delivers 6.774 TFLOPS. AMD's figure is more than 2.5 times higher.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each GPU?

A: The AMD GPU has 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA GPU has 6 GB GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with 168.0 GB/s bandwidth. Both use GDDR6 memory, but AMD has more capacity and bandwidth.

Q: How does the RTX 3050 6 GB compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: Its average benchmark score is 2329. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M scores 2335 (0.3% higher), the NVIDIA Quadro P620 scores 2339 (0.4% higher), the Intel HD Graphics 510 scores 2305 (1% lower), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 550M scores 2363 (1.4% higher). The RTX 3050 6 GB sits in the middle of this group.

Q: Which GPU has more transistor density?

A: The AMD Steam Machine GPU has 65.2 million transistors per mm², with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die. The NVIDIA RTX 3050 6 GB has 43.5 million per mm², with 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD GPU has a TDP of 110 W. The NVIDIA GPU has a TDP of 70 W. NVIDIA also lists a suggested PSU of 250 W, while AMD lists no suggested PSU.

Q: Does either GPU include tensor cores?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 3050 6 GB includes 72 tensor cores. The AMD Steam Machine GPU has no tensor cores listed in its specifications. Both include ray tracing hardware: 28 ray tracing cores on AMD and 18 RT cores on NVIDIA.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between these two GPUs. The winsA and winsB counters are both zero. This absence of comparative measurements is itself informative. The AMD Steam Machine GPU has no benchmark entries at all, while the NVIDIA RTX 3050 6 GB has eight recorded benchmark scores. The AMD GPU's percentile ranking of 50 comes from its specification profile, not from measured performance data. The NVIDIA GPU's percentile of 15 comes from its measured results.

For the NVIDIA RTX 3050 6 GB, the individual benchmark scores show its performance distribution. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 1515. In Passmark DirectX tests, it scores 59 in DirectX 10, 72 in DirectX 11, 53 in DirectX 12, and 124 in DirectX 9. The DirectX 9 score of 124 is notably higher than the DirectX 12 score of 53, suggesting the GPU handles legacy API workloads relatively better. Its Passmark G3D score is 10738, and its Passmark GPU compute score is 5192. The G2D score is 882.

The nearest rivals for the RTX 3050 6 GB provide context for its standing. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M, a mobile GPU from an older generation, scores 0.3% higher. The NVIDIA Quadro P620, a professional workstation card, scores 0.4% higher. The Intel HD Graphics 510, an integrated solution, scores 1% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 550M, another older mobile part, scores 1.4% higher. This clustering of rivals within a 2.4% spread indicates the RTX 3050 6 GB occupies a tightly contested performance band where small differences separate competitors.

The AMD Steam Machine GPU's specification advantage suggests it would win in most direct comparisons, but the absence of measured data means this remains an inference from specifications rather than a confirmed result. Its 17.56 TFLOPS FP32, 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 8 GB memory capacity place it in a different performance class than the RTX 3050 6 GB. The NVIDIA card's 6.774 TFLOPS and 168.0 GB/s bandwidth are roughly 38.6% of AMD's FP32 figure and 58.3% of AMD's bandwidth. These gaps are substantial enough that benchmark results, if recorded, would likely show AMD ahead in compute-heavy tests.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. The manufacturing process: AMD uses 6 nm at TSMC, NVIDIA uses 8 nm at Samsung. Transistor counts: 13,300 million for AMD versus 8,700 million for NVIDIA. Die size: 204 mm² for AMD versus 200 mm² for NVIDIA. Transistor density: 65.2M per mm² for AMD versus 43.5M per mm² for NVIDIA.

Clock speeds show AMD at 1720 MHz base, 2250 MHz game, and 2450 MHz boost. NVIDIA runs at 1042 MHz base and 1470 MHz boost. Memory configuration: AMD has 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed, producing 288.0 GB/s. NVIDIA has 6 GB GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective speed, producing 168.0 GB/s.

Compute resources: AMD has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores. NVIDIA has 2304 shading units, 72 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 18 RT cores, and 72 tensor cores. Pixel rates: 156.8 GPixel/s for AMD versus 47.04 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rates: 274.4 GTexel/s versus 105.8 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 both run at 17.56 TFLOPS for AMD and 6.774 TFLOPS for NVIDIA, with 1:1 ratios on both.

Power and physical specifications: AMD has a 110 W TDP, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU. NVIDIA has a 70 W TDP, no power connectors, and a 250 W suggested PSU. The NVIDIA card is dual-slot with a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface; AMD lists no slot width or bus interface. Display outputs: AMD provides 1x HDMI 2.1a and 1x DisplayPort 2.1. NVIDIA provides 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. Dimensions: AMD is 156 mm long, 152 mm high, and 162 mm wide. NVIDIA is 242 mm long and 112 mm high. The API support is identical: both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Production status differs: AMD is active, NVIDIA is end-of-life. The NVIDIA card has a launch MSRP of 179 USD.