NVIDIA GeForce MX350 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile scores 12,940 on average, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX350 scores 10,883. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile sits at the 53rd percentile of all GPUs, and the MX350 sits at the 49th percentile.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in OpenCL performance?

A: The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile scores 57,915 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 566.5% higher than the MX350's 8,689. This is the largest delta between the two in any benchmark.

Q: What about Vulkan performance?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile scores 55,812 versus 13,077 for the MX350, a 326.8% advantage. Both GPUs support Vulkan 1.4, but the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile delivers substantially higher throughput.

Q: Which GPU has more VRAM?

A: The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, while the MX350 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile also offers 192.0 GB/s of bandwidth versus 56.06 GB/s for the MX350.

Q: Are these GPUs still in production?

A: No. Both are marked as end-of-life in the database. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile was released on 2021-05-10, and the MX350 was released on 2020-02-09.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile has a transistor density of 43.5M per mm², compared to 25.0M per mm² for the MX350. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile packs 12,000 million transistors on a 276 mm² die, while the MX350 has 3,300 million on a 132 mm² die.

Architecture Differences

The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is built on the Ampere architecture using the GA106 chip, manufactured on an 8 nm process at Samsung. The MX350 uses the older Pascal architecture with the GP107S chip, built on a 14 nm process, also at Samsung. This generational leap gives the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile a much smaller process node, which contributes to its higher transistor density of 43.5M per mm² versus 25.0M per mm².

The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile features 2,560 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. It also includes 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores, features that the MX350 completely lacks (the MX350 lists no RT or tensor core counts). The MX350 has 640 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, which is a fraction of the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's compute resources.

Memory architecture differs substantially. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile uses 4 GB of GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus and 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MX350 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 with a 64-bit bus and 56.06 GB/s. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile also supports PCIe 4.0 x16, while the MX350 is limited to PCIe 3.0 x4. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's memory clock runs at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective), versus 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective) for the MX350.

DirectX support differs as well. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the MX350 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's FP32 throughput is 5.299 TFLOPS, nearly three times the MX350's 1.879 TFLOPS. FP16 performance also diverges sharply: the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile achieves 5.299 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the MX350 only manages 29.36 GFLOPS with a 1:64 ratio, indicating a far weaker half-precision path.

Power draw tells the story of intended use. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile has a TDP of 75 W, while the MX350 is rated at just 20 W. Both use no external power connectors and are designed for portable devices with display output dependent on the host system.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two shared benchmarks between these GPUs, and the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile wins both decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile scores 57,915 against the MX350's 8,689, a 566.5% lead. This is not a marginal advantage; it is a multi-generational gap in raw compute throughput. The MX350's score is closer to entry-level integrated graphics, while the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's score places it in the same performance band as desktop cards from a few years prior.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile scores 55,812 versus 13,077, a 326.8% lead. While the percentage delta is smaller than in OpenCL, the absolute difference of 42,735 points is still enormous. Vulkan is often a better indicator of real gaming API performance, and the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's support for DirectX 12 Ultimate and ray tracing cores suggests it handles modern workloads more gracefully.

The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile has 2 benchmark wins out of 2 head-to-head tests. The MX350 has zero wins. For context, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's average score of 12,940 puts it 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 580 (12,928), 0.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon 740M (12,870), and 0.7% ahead of the AMD FirePro W5100 (12,847). It trails the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER (12,986) by 0.4%. The MX350's average score of 10,883 puts it 0.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 450 (10,804) and 1.1% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 (10,761), but it lags the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER (11,047) by 1.5% and the AMD Radeon RX 550 (11,075) by 1.7%.

The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's nearest rival grouping shows it sits in a performance tier with mid-range desktop GPUs from the RX 500 and GTX 16 series. The MX350, by contrast, competes with older professional workstation cards and entry-level desktop GPUs.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is the superior GPU by every measurable metric. Its average benchmark score is 18.9% higher than the MX350's (12,940 versus 10,883). In the two direct comparisons, it leads by 566.5% in OpenCL and 326.8% in Vulkan. It has more memory, faster memory, a wider bus, more shading units, ray tracing cores, tensor cores, and a newer architecture. The MX350 is a low-power Pascal chip from 2020, designed for light laptop workloads; the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is a full Ampere mobile GPU from 2021 with modern feature support.

The only argument for the MX350 is power consumption. At 20 W, it draws about a quarter of the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's 75 W. For ultra-thin laptops where battery life is paramount and gaming is secondary, the MX350 might still serve a niche. But the benchmark data shows that even in that niche, the performance penalty is severe: the MX350's Vulkan score is roughly 23% of the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's, and its OpenCL score is about 15%.

For anyone choosing between these two in a laptop, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is the clear pick if GPU performance matters at all. The MX350 is only sensible if the laptop's thermal and power constraints absolutely cannot accommodate a 75 W GPU.

Specification Differences

| Field | RTX 3050 Ti Mobile | MX350 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Ampere | Pascal |

| Chip | GA106 | GP107S |

| Process node | 8 nm | 14 nm |

| Transistors | 12,000 million | 3,300 million |

| Die size | 276 mm² | 132 mm² |

| Transistor density | 43.5M / mm² | 25.0M / mm² |

| Base clock | 735 MHz | 1354 MHz |

| Boost clock | 1035 MHz | 1468 MHz |

| Memory size | 4 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory bus | 128 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 192.0 GB/s | 56.06 GB/s |

| Memory clock | 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) | 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective) |

| Shading units | 2560 | 640 |

| TMUs | 80 | 32 |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| RT cores | 20 | None |

| Tensor cores | 80 | None |

| Pixel rate | 33.12 GPixel/s | 23.49 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 82.80 GTexel/s | 46.98 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 5.299 TFLOPS | 1.879 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 5.299 TFLOPS (1:1) | 29.36 GFLOPS (1:64) |

| TDP | 75 W | 20 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x4 |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| Release date | 2021-05-10 | 2020-02-09 |

| Slot width | IGP | Not specified |

The clock speeds tell an interesting story. The MX350 has a higher base clock (1354 MHz versus 735 MHz) and higher boost clock (1468 MHz versus 1035 MHz), but this is because it is a much smaller chip with fewer units to feed. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile compensates with vastly more shaders and a wider memory bus, resulting in far higher aggregate throughput despite lower clocks.

Where Each One Wins

RTX 3050 Ti Mobile wins in:

• All recorded benchmark tests: OpenCL by 566.5%, Vulkan by 326.8%
• Modern gaming workloads: DirectX 12 Ultimate support, ray tracing cores, and tensor cores enable features the MX350 cannot handle at all
• Memory-intensive tasks: 192.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 56.06 GB/s, plus double the VRAM (4 GB versus 2 GB)
• Compute-heavy applications: 5.299 TFLOPS FP32 versus 1.879 TFLOPS, and a 1:1 FP16 ratio versus 1:64, making mixed-precision work far more practical
• PCIe bandwidth: PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x4, which matters for GPU-accelerated workloads that stream data from system memory
• Future-proofing: Ampere architecture with 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores, versus Pascal with none

MX350 wins in:

• Power efficiency: 20 W TDP versus 75 W, making it suitable for fanless or ultra-low-power designs
• Clock speed on paper: higher base and boost clocks (1354 MHz and 1468 MHz versus 735 MHz and 1035 MHz), though this does not translate into higher real-world performance
• Undefined: the database records no benchmark where the MX350 beats the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile

The MX350's only practical advantage is its power envelope. In a laptop where the GPU is secondary to battery life and thermals, the MX350 consumes less energy and generates less heat. But the performance gap is so large that any task beyond basic 2D acceleration or very light 3D work will feel sluggish on the MX350 compared to the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile also has a higher pixel rate (33.12 GPixel/s versus 23.49 GPixel/s) and texture rate (82.80 GTexel/s versus 46.98 GTexel/s), meaning it fills frames faster and handles higher resolutions more comfortably.

For gaming, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's 4 GB VRAM and 128-bit bus are the minimum for modern titles at 1080p with medium settings. The MX350's 2 GB VRAM and 64-bit bus will struggle with texture-heavy games and may hit memory limits even at low settings. For creative work such as video editing or 3D rendering, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's tensor cores and higher FP32 throughput provide a decisive edge. The MX350 is best reserved for office productivity, web browsing, and light media playback, where its low power draw is an asset and its limited compute is rarely stressed.