NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Comparison

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the RTX 5050 is in a completely different performance class. In the two shared benchmark tests, the RTX 5050 wins both, with the GTX 1630 trailing by 72.5% in OpenCL and 73.5% in Vulkan. The GTX 1630 is an end-of-life part from the GeForce 16 generation, built for basic display output and light workloads. The RTX 5050 is an active Blackwell 2.0 part with ray tracing cores, tensor cores, and roughly seven times the raw FP32 throughput. Pick the GTX 1630 only if you need a low-power, single-slot card for a legacy system with PCIe 3.0 and no external power connector, and your tasks are limited to 2D work or very old games. Pick the RTX 5050 for any modern gaming, compute, or ray-traced workload. The 4 GB memory capacity on the GTX 1630 is a hard ceiling for current titles, whereas the RTX 5050 carries 8 GB. The RTX 5050 also demands a 300 W suggested PSU and a PCIe 5.0 x8 slot, so check your platform before buying.

Architecture Differences

The GTX 1630 uses the TU117 chip, a Turing architecture part built on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It packs 4,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 23.5 million per mm². The RTX 5050 uses the GB207 chip, a Blackwell 2.0 architecture part on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. It holds 16,900 million transistors in a smaller 149 mm² die, resulting in a density of 113.4 million per mm², nearly five times denser.

The GTX 1630 has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. It has no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The RTX 5050 has 2,560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, plus 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores. The FP32 compute rating is 1.828 TFLOPS for the GTX 1630 versus 13.17 TFLOPS for the RTX 5050, a 7.2x gap. FP16 on the GTX 1630 is 3.656 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the RTX 5050 achieves 13.17 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, meaning it does not halve throughput for FP16.

Memory subsystems differ sharply. The GTX 1630 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 5050 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 320.0 GB/s, more than triple. Pixel rate on the GTX 1630 is 28.56 GPixel/s versus 82.30 GPixel/s on the RTX 5050. Texture rate is 57.12 GTexel/s versus 205.8 GTexel/s.

Interface support also splits. The GTX 1630 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, with PCIe 3.0 x16. The RTX 5050 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, with PCIe 5.0 x8. Display outputs: the GTX 1630 has 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a. The RTX 5050 has 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains two direct comparisons: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. The RTX 5050 dominates both.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 1630 scores 24,858 while the RTX 5050 scores 90,334. That is a delta of 72.5% in favor of the RTX 5050. The RTX 5050 is roughly 3.6 times faster in raw compute throughput as measured by OpenCL.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the GTX 1630 scores 23,695 while the RTX 5050 scores 89,381. The delta is 73.5% in favor of the RTX 5050. Again, the RTX 5050 is about 3.8 times faster.

The GTX 1630 has zero wins across the shared tests; the RTX 5050 has two.

To contextualize the GTX 1630: its average benchmark score of 24,277 places it near the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti (24,236, 0.2% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER (24,170, 0.4% ahead), the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT (24,442, 0.7% behind), and the AMD Radeon RX 6800S (24,063, 0.9% ahead). That is a strange grouping: the GTX 1630 is competitive with much higher-tier cards in this specific aggregate metric, likely due to driver optimizations or benchmark weighting, but the head-to-head results tell a clearer story.

For the RTX 5050, its average benchmark score of 21,035 places it near the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (21,153, 0.6% behind), the AMD Radeon HD 8970M (21,237, 1% behind), the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (20,713, 1.6% ahead), and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile (21,379, 1.6% behind). The RTX 5050 sits within 1.6% of these parts in aggregate, despite its much higher compute rating, which suggests the average score is pulled down by its DirectX 9 and DirectX 10 Passmark results (186 and 103, respectively). The GTX 1630 has no Passmark entries in the database.

The RTX 5050 also has a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,502 and Passmark G3D of 17,326, with a GPU compute score of 9,184. The GTX 1630 has no comparable entries.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The RTX 5050 has 320.0 GB/s of bandwidth on a 128-bit bus. The GTX 1630 has 96.00 GB/s on a 64-bit bus. The RTX 5050 offers more than triple the bandwidth.

Q: Does the GTX 1630 support ray tracing?

A: No. The GTX 1630 has no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The RTX 5050 includes 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores.

Q: Which card requires a higher wattage power supply?

A: The RTX 5050 has a suggested PSU of 300 W and a TDP of 130 W, with a single 8-pin power connector. The GTX 1630 has a suggested PSU of 250 W and a TDP of 75 W, with no power connectors required.

Q: What is the difference in FP32 compute performance?

A: The RTX 5050 delivers 13.17 TFLOPS of FP32, while the GTX 1630 delivers 1.828 TFLOPS. The RTX 5050 is about 7.2 times faster.

Q: Which card is better for modern DirectX 12 Ultimate titles?

A: The RTX 5050 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The GTX 1630 only supports DirectX 12 (12_1). For games that require DirectX 12 Ultimate features, the RTX 5050 is the only option.

Q: Are these cards compatible with the same PCIe slot?

A: No. The GTX 1630 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the RTX 5050 uses PCIe 5.0 x8. The RTX 5050 will work in a PCIe 4.0 or PCIe 3.0 slot, but the GTX 1630 is a legacy interface part.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5050 wins every recorded comparison. In OpenCL, it is 72.5% ahead. In Vulkan, it is 73.5% ahead. Its compute hardware is fundamentally newer: Blackwell 2.0 with tensor cores and ray tracing, versus Turing without either. The RTX 5050 also has 8 GB of memory versus 4 GB, a 128-bit bus versus 64-bit, and more than triple the bandwidth. It is the clear choice for any workload involving modern graphics APIs, ray tracing, or GPU compute.

The GTX 1630 has no benchmark wins in the database. Its only practical advantages are physical and electrical: single-slot width, no power connectors, a 75 W TDP, and a 250 W suggested PSU. It also requires no auxiliary power cable, which can be useful in older prebuilt systems with weak power supplies. Its PCIe 3.0 x16 interface is widely compatible with older motherboards, and it includes a DVI output, which the RTX 5050 lacks. For a system that cannot accommodate a dual-slot card or an 8-pin connector, the GTX 1630 remains functional, but only for basic display tasks or very lightweight gaming.

The RTX 5050 is dual-slot, has a 130 W TDP, and requires a 300 W PSU and one 8-pin connector. It is also a PCIe 5.0 x8 card, so older boards with PCIe 3.0 will run it at reduced link bandwidth, though the card will still operate. The RTX 5050 is active in production, while the GTX 1630 is end-of-life.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The GTX 1630 uses the TU117 chip on a 12 nm process; the RTX 5050 uses the GB207 chip on a 5 nm process. Transistor count is 4,700 million versus 16,900 million, and die size is 200 mm² versus 149 mm². Transistor density is 23.5M per mm² versus 113.4M per mm².

Clocks: the GTX 1630 has a base of 1740 MHz and a boost of 1785 MHz. The RTX 5050 has a base of 2317 MHz and a boost of 2572 MHz. Memory clock is 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) on the GTX 1630 versus 2500 MHz (20 Gbps effective) on the RTX 5050.

Memory: 4 GB GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth versus 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 320.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute units: 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, no RT or tensor cores on the GTX 1630. The RTX 5050 has 2,560 shading units, 80 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 20 RT cores, and 80 tensor cores. Pixel rate is 28.56 GPixel/s versus 82.30 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 57.12 GTexel/s versus 205.8 GTexel/s. FP32 is 1.828 TFLOPS versus 13.17 TFLOPS. FP16 is 3.656 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 13.17 TFLOPS (1:1).

Power and physical: TDP is 75 W versus 130 W. Slot width is single-slot versus dual-slot. Power connectors are none versus 1x 8-pin. Suggested PSU is 250 W versus 300 W. Bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16 versus PCIe 5.0 x8.

Display outputs: 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a versus 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b.

APIs: DirectX 12 (12_1) versus DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), with OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4 on both.

Dimensions: the GTX 1630 is 145 mm long, 69 mm high, and 18 mm wide. The RTX 5050 has no recorded dimensions.

Production status: end-of-life versus active. Release dates: June 2022 for the GTX 1630, June 2025 for the RTX 5050. The RTX 5050 has a launch MSRP of 249 USD. The GTX 1630 has no recorded MSRP.