NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile Comparison

The GeForce GTX 950 and the GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile represent two distinct eras of NVIDIA mobile and desktop graphics. The data shows the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is the unequivocal performance leader, winning both head-to-head benchmark comparisons by substantial margins. However, the GTX 950 holds its own in the historical context of its generation, with both GPUs landing at the 53rd percentile among all GPUs in the database. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile delivers a transformative generational leap, while the GTX 950 remains a competent, if dated, entry-level solution.

The Verdict

Based strictly on benchmark data, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is the clear choice for anyone prioritizing raw compute performance. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile scores 57,915, which is 73% higher than the GTX 950's 15,662. Similarly, in the Geekbench Vulkan test, it scores 55,812, a 70% improvement over the GTX 950's 16,734. These are not marginal gains; they represent a fundamental shift in processing capability.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 , despite its age and lower scores, is not without merit. Its average benchmark score of 13,189 is nearly identical to the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's 12,940, a difference of less than 2%. This indicates that in a broader set of legacy or less-demanding workloads, the GTX 950 can still deliver comparable overall performance. For a user constrained to older software or specific use cases, the GTX 950 remains a viable option, though its 2 GB memory and Maxwell architecture limit its future-proofing.

The verdict is therefore split by context. For modern gaming, compute-heavy tasks, and any workload that leverages DirectX 12 Ultimate or ray tracing, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is the only rational selection. For a budget-conscious build focused on older titles or basic 2D/3D tasks, the GTX 950's similar average score suggests it can handle those duties without being a bottleneck, despite its clear technical inferiority in raw compute.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and manufacturing processes. The GTX 950 is based on the GM206 chip using Maxwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. In contrast, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile uses the GA106 chip with Ampere architecture, produced on Samsung's 8 nm process node. This process shrink allows the Ampere chip to pack 12,000 million transistors into a 276 mm² die, compared to the Maxwell chip's 2,940 million transistors on a 228 mm² die. This results in a transistor density of 43.5M / mm² for the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile versus 12.9M / mm² for the GTX 950, a 3.4x increase in density.

Core configuration differences are stark. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile features 2,560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, along with 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores. The GTX 950 has only 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with no dedicated RT or tensor cores. The Ampere GPU also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and offers FP16 compute at 5.299 TFLOPS (1:1) , while the Maxwell chip is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1) and has no listed FP16 capability. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, but the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's feature set is clearly more advanced.

Memory architecture also differs significantly. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory with a 192.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the GTX 950 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 with 105.8 GB/s bandwidth. Both use a 128-bit bus, but the newer memory type and higher effective speed (12 Gbps vs 6.6 Gbps) give the Ampere card a clear bandwidth advantage.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile wins decisively in compute-heavy and modern API workloads. Its OpenCL score of 57,915 is nearly 3.7x higher than the GTX 950's, indicating massive advantages in general-purpose GPU computing, physics simulations, and machine learning inference. The Vulkan score of 55,812 similarly shows superior performance in modern game engines that utilize Vulkan for rendering. The presence of RT and tensor cores further positions the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile for ray-traced gaming and DLSS-enhanced titles, though the data does not include specific tests for these features.

The GTX 950 , despite losing the head-to-head tests, shows competitive overall average performance. Its average benchmark score of 13,189 is 1.9% higher than the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's 12,940, suggesting that in a mixed workload of older DirectX and OpenGL applications, the GTX 950 can perform on par with or slightly better than its newer rival. This is likely due to its higher base clock of 1024 MHz and boost clock of 1188 MHz, compared to the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's 735 MHz base and 1035 MHz boost. The GTX 950's higher pixel rate of 38.02 GPixel/s versus 33.12 GPixel/s for the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile also indicates an edge in certain rasterization-heavy tasks at lower resolutions.

For a user targeting esports titles or older DX9/DX10 games, the GTX 950's higher clock speeds and pixel throughput may translate to better frame rates in those specific scenarios. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is the winner for anything modern, demanding, or compute-centric.

FAQ

Q: Is the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile faster than the GTX 950 in all benchmarks?

A: No. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile wins both head-to-head tests (OpenCL and Vulkan), but the GTX 950 has a slightly higher average benchmark score (13,189 vs 12,940), indicating it can outperform the newer card in aggregate legacy workloads.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest gap is in the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile scores 57,915 versus the GTX 950's 15,662, a 73% delta in favor of the Ampere GPU.

Q: Does the GTX 950 support any modern features like ray tracing?

A: No. The GTX 950 has no RT cores and is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile includes 20 RT cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2).

Q: How do the memory capacities compare?

A: The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the GTX 950 has 2 GB of GDDR5. The newer card also has higher bandwidth at 192.0 GB/s versus 105.8 GB/s.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The GTX 950 has a higher boost clock of 1188 MHz, compared to the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's 1035 MHz. This contributes to the GTX 950's higher pixel rate.

Q: Are both GPUs in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both the GTX 950 and the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile are at the 53rd percentile among all GPUs in the database, despite their massive architectural differences.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two available head-to-head tests paint a clear picture of the performance divide. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile achieves a score of 57,915, compared to the GTX 950's 15,662. This represents a -73% delta for the GTX 950, meaning the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is roughly 3.7x faster in this compute-oriented test. This is the single largest performance gap in the data and reflects the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's superior shading unit count (2,560 vs 768), higher texture rate (82.80 GTexel/s vs 57.02 GTexel/s), and significantly higher FP32 throughput (5.299 TFLOPS vs 1.825 TFLOPS).

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile again dominates with a score of 55,812 versus the GTX 950's 16,734, a -70% delta. While slightly smaller than the OpenCL gap, this still demonstrates a more than 3.3x performance advantage. This result is particularly relevant for modern gaming, as Vulkan is increasingly used in AAA titles and esports engines. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's support for newer APIs and its larger memory pool (4 GB vs 2 GB) likely contribute to this substantial lead.

The GTX 950's only competitive metric in these tests is its higher pixel rate (38.02 GPixel/s vs 33.12 GPixel/s), but this does not translate into a win in either benchmark. The data shows that the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's architectural advantages overwhelm the GTX 950's clock speed advantages in both compute and graphics workloads.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two GPUs, highlighting the generational shift:

• Chip: GM206 (GTX 950) vs GA106 (RTX 3050 Ti Mobile)
• Architecture: Maxwell 2.0 vs Ampere
• Process Node: 28 nm (TSMC) vs 8 nm (Samsung)
• Transistors: 2,940 million vs 12,000 million
• Die Size: 228 mm² vs 276 mm²
• Transistor Density: 12.9M / mm² vs 43.5M / mm²
• Base Clock: 1024 MHz vs 735 MHz
• Boost Clock: 1188 MHz vs 1035 MHz
• Memory Speed: 6.6 Gbps effective vs 12 Gbps effective
• Memory Size: 2 GB GDDR5 vs 4 GB GDDR6
• Memory Bandwidth: 105.8 GB/s vs 192.0 GB/s
• Shading Units: 768 vs 2560
• TMUs: 48 vs 80
• RT Cores: None vs 20
• Tensor Cores: None vs 80
• Pixel Rate: 38.02 GPixel/s vs 33.12 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 57.02 GTexel/s vs 82.80 GTexel/s
• FP32: 1.825 TFLOPS vs 5.299 TFLOPS
• FP16: None listed vs 5.299 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 90 W vs 75 W
• Slot Width: Dual-slot vs IGP
• Power Connectors: 1x 6-pin vs None
• Suggested PSU: 250 W vs None listed
• Bus Interface: PCIe 3.0 x16 vs PCIe 4.0 x16
• Display Outputs: 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 vs Portable Device Dependent
• DirectX Support: 12 (12_1) vs 12 Ultimate (12_2)
• Release Date: 2015-08-19 vs 2021-05-10
• Predecessor: GeForce 700 vs GeForce 20 Mobile
• Successor: GeForce 10 vs None listed
• Launch MSRP: 159 USD vs None listed