NVIDIA GeForce MX330 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile and the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 represent two very different mobile graphics tiers. The RTX 3050 A Mobile is a modern Ampere-based part designed for dedicated gaming laptops, while the MX330 is a Pascal-based entry-level chip for basic multimedia and light productivity. Benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap between them, but the MX330’s ultra-low power draw and the RTX 3050 A Mobile’s feature set make them suitable for entirely different use cases.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the RTX 3050 A Mobile than the MX330 in the available benchmark?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 52,998, while the MX330 scores 7,896. This represents a 571.2% advantage for the RTX 3050 A Mobile.

Q: What are the core counts and memory configurations of these two GPUs?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile has 1,792 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, 32 ROPs, 14 RT cores, and 56 tensor cores. It uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MX330 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 64-bit bus with 56.06 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the MX330 support ray tracing or DLSS?

A: No. The MX330 is based on Pascal architecture and has no RT cores or tensor cores listed in its specifications. The RTX 3050 A Mobile, based on Ampere, includes 14 RT cores for hardware ray tracing and 56 tensor cores for AI-accelerated features.

Q: What is the power consumption difference between the two?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile has a TDP of 45 W, while the MX330 is rated at just 10 W. Both are listed as IGP (integrated graphics processor) form factors with no power connectors.

Q: Which GPU has better DirectX support?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the MX330 supports DirectX 12 (12_1). The RTX 3050 A Mobile also has a higher Vulkan version (1.4 vs 1.4, same) but the key difference is the DirectX feature level.

Q: Are both GPUs still in production?

A: No. Both are listed as end-of-life products. The MX330 was released earlier (2020-02-09) than the RTX 3050 A Mobile (2023-12-31).

The Verdict

The data points to a clear recommendation for anyone needing gaming or content creation performance: the RTX 3050 A Mobile is in a completely different league. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 52,998 is over 6.7 times higher than the MX330’s 7,896, and it carries the architectural weight of Ampere with dedicated RT and tensor cores.

The MX330, however, has one undeniable strength: efficiency. At 10 W TDP, it consumes a fraction of the 45 W required by the RTX 3050 A Mobile. This makes it suitable for ultra-thin laptops where battery life and thermals are prioritized over raw performance. It can handle basic display output, video playback, and light 2D workloads without stressing the system.

For gaming, the RTX 3050 A Mobile’s 4 GB GDDR6 memory and 192.0 GB/s bandwidth are essential for modern titles, while the MX330’s 2 GB GDDR5 and 56.06 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient. The RTX 3050 A Mobile’s 44th percentile ranking among all GPUs, compared to the MX330’s 43rd percentile, shows both are near the middle of the pack, but the raw scores tell the real story.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only shared benchmark between the two is Geekbench OpenCL, and it is a total rout. The RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 52,998, while the MX330 scores 7,896. The delta is 571.2%, meaning the RTX 3050 A Mobile is roughly 5.7 times faster in compute workloads.

This single data point aligns perfectly with the hardware specifications. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has 1,792 shading units versus the MX330’s 384, a 4.67x difference. Its FP32 throughput is 4,813 TFLOPS versus 1,224.2 GFLOPS, a 3.93x difference. Memory bandwidth is 192.0 GB/s versus 56.06 GB/s, a 3.42x difference.

The RTX 3050 A Mobile also shows wins in the broader benchmark suite, scoring 11,664 in Passmark G3D and 4,419 in Passmark GPU Compute. The MX330 lacks these specific benchmark results, but its average benchmark score of 8,458 is below the RTX 3050 A Mobile’s average of 8,746. Notably, the MX330’s nearest rival, AMD Radeon HD 8870M, scores 8,462, which is nearly identical to the MX330, confirming its position as an entry-level part.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every measurable specification. The RTX 3050 A Mobile uses an 8 nm process with 12,000 million transistors on a 276 mm² die, while the MX330 uses a 14 nm process with 1,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. Transistor density is 43.5M per mm² for the RTX 3050 A Mobile versus 24.3M per mm² for the MX330.

Clock speeds show the MX330 actually runs higher: base 1531 MHz and boost 1594 MHz, compared to the RTX 3050 A Mobile’s 1065 MHz base and 1343 MHz boost. Memory clocks differ as well, with the RTX 3050 A Mobile at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) and the MX330 at 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective).

Memory configuration is a major differentiator: 4 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus for the RTX 3050 A Mobile versus 2 GB GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus for the MX330. The RTX 3050 A Mobile also has 14 RT cores and 56 tensor cores, which the MX330 lacks entirely. Bus interface differs: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the RTX 3050 A Mobile versus PCIe 3.0 x4 for the MX330. TDP is 45 W versus 10 W.

Architecture Differences

The RTX 3050 A Mobile is built on the Ampere architecture using the GA106 chip, manufactured by Samsung on an 8 nm node. It is part of the GeForce 30 Mobile generation, and its predecessor is GeForce 20 Mobile. The MX330 uses the Pascal architecture with the GP108B chip, also from Samsung but on a 14 nm node. The MX330 belongs to the GeForce MX (3xx) generation and has no listed predecessor.

The architectural gap is most visible in compute capabilities. The RTX 3050 A Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and offers FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, both at 4.813 TFLOPS. The MX330 only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1) and has a severely limited FP16 rate of 19.13 GFLOPS, a 1:64 ratio. This means the MX330 is not designed for modern compute-heavy workloads.

The RTX 3050 A Mobile’s 14 RT cores enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing, a feature completely absent from the MX330’s Pascal design. Similarly, the 56 tensor cores on the RTX 3050 A Mobile allow for AI-based features like DLSS, while the MX330 has none. The RTX 3050 A Mobile also offers higher pixel rate (42.98 GPixel/s vs 25.50 GPixel/s) and texture rate (75.21 GTexel/s vs 38.26 GTexel/s).

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3050 A Mobile wins in every performance category measured. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 571.2% higher, and its average benchmark score of 8,746 exceeds the MX330’s 8,458. It wins on memory size, bandwidth, core counts, and feature support. For gaming, content creation, or any GPU-accelerated workload, the RTX 3050 A Mobile is the clear choice.

The MX330 wins in power efficiency. At 10 W TDP, it uses 22% of the power of the RTX 3050 A Mobile’s 45 W. This makes it ideal for basic office work, web browsing, and video streaming in ultra-portable laptops where battery life is paramount. Its higher base and boost clocks (1531 MHz and 1594 MHz vs 1065 MHz and 1343 MHz) suggest it can handle simple 2D tasks with low latency.

The MX330’s PCIe 3.0 x4 interface and 2 GB GDDR5 memory are sufficient for its intended role as a display adapter. It will not run modern games at acceptable settings, but it does provide a smoother experience than integrated graphics from the same era. The RTX 3050 A Mobile, with its 4 GB memory and ray tracing support, is a legitimate entry-level gaming GPU that can handle esports titles and older AAA games at medium settings.

In summary, the RTX 3050 A Mobile is a capable gaming and compute solution, while the MX330 is an efficiency-focused part for basic tasks. There is no overlap in their intended use cases, and the benchmark data confirms that the RTX 3050 A Mobile is in a different performance class entirely.