NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a comprehensive sweep for the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER across every benchmark in the comparison set. The RTX 3050 A Mobile fails to win a single test, with the RTX 4070 SUPER taking all eight head-to-head matchups. The margin of victory varies by workload, but the pattern is consistent: the newer Ada Lovelace part dominates in every measured category.

The largest gap appears in passmark_gpu_compute, where the RTX 4070 SUPER scores 17108 against 4419 for the RTX 3050 A Mobile, a delta of 74.2% in favor of the RTX 4070 SUPER. This indicates a massive difference in raw compute throughput, which aligns with the specification gap between the two chips. The Geekbench OpenCL test shows a similarly decisive result: 172795 for the RTX 4070 SUPER versus 52998 for the RTX 3050 A Mobile, a 69.3% advantage. This test exercises general-purpose GPU compute across a wide range of operations, and the data suggests the RTX 4070 SUPER delivers roughly 3.3 times the OpenCL performance of the older mobile part.

The passmark_g3d score, which represents overall 3D graphics performance, gives the RTX 4070 SUPER a 29995 score against 11664 for the RTX 3050 A Mobile, a 61.1% delta. This is the most direct measure of gaming-oriented rasterization performance in the database, and the gap is substantial. The DirectX 11 test shows a 65.6% delta (273 versus 94), while the DirectX 10 test shows a 63.5% delta (167 versus 61). DirectX 12 performance narrows the relative gap to 50% (110 versus 55), but the absolute scores remain far apart. The DirectX 9 result, which often reflects older engine compatibility and fixed-function throughput, gives the RTX 4070 SUPER a 55.8% edge (344 versus 152).

Even the 2D graphics test, passmark_g2d, favors the RTX 4070 SUPER by 55.6% (1184 versus 526). While 2D workloads are rarely a bottleneck for modern GPUs, the difference indicates that the RTX 4070 SUPER has higher memory bandwidth and faster pixel processing even in less demanding scenarios. The smallest relative margin across the board is the DirectX 12 test at 50%, but that still represents a doubling of the RTX 3050 A Mobile's score.

The average benchmark score in the database tells the same story. The RTX 3050 A Mobile sits at 8746, placing it in the 44th percentile of all GPUs tracked. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 at 8743 (0% delta), the AMD Radeon R9 M265X at 8851 (1.2% higher), and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 at 8863 (1.3% higher). The RTX 4070 SUPER, by contrast, averages 43223, which places it in the 83rd percentile. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB at 43262 (0.1% lower), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile at 43268 (0.1% lower), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile at 43667 (1% lower). The RTX 4070 SUPER's average score is nearly five times that of the RTX 3050 A Mobile, a gap that reflects the generational and architectural divide between the two products.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the most benchmarks in the head-to-head comparison?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER wins all eight recorded benchmarks, with the RTX 3050 A Mobile winning none.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two GPUs?

A: The largest gap is in passmark_gpu_compute, where the RTX 4070 SUPER leads by 74.2% (17108 versus 4419).

Q: How does the RTX 3050 A Mobile compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 with a delta of 0%, followed by the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 at 0.7% higher, and the AMD Radeon R9 M265X at 1.2% higher.

Q: Where does the RTX 4070 SUPER rank among all GPUs?

A: The RTX 4070 SUPER sits in the 83rd percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 43223.

Q: Does the RTX 3050 A Mobile have any benchmark where it comes close to the RTX 4070 SUPER?

A: The closest margin is in passmark_directx_12, where the RTX 4070 SUPER leads by 50% (110 versus 55), but it still wins decisively.

Q: What is the RTX 4070 SUPER's nearest rival in the database?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB is the nearest rival, with an average score of 43262, which is 0.1% lower than the RTX 4070 SUPER's 43223.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different NVIDIA generations and use completely different chip designs. The RTX 3050 A Mobile is based on the GA106 chip, built on Samsung's 8 nm process with 12,000 million transistors on a 276 mm² die. The RTX 4070 SUPER uses the AD104 chip, fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process with 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. The transistor density tells a stark story: the RTX 4070 SUPER packs 121.8 million transistors per square millimeter, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile manages 43.5 million per square millimeter. This density advantage, combined with the newer architecture, explains much of the performance gap.

The RTX 3050 A Mobile belongs to the Ampere architecture, part of the GeForce 30 Mobile generation. The RTX 4070 SUPER uses Ada Lovelace, part of the GeForce 40 generation. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is identical. However, the internal hardware differs substantially. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has 1792 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units. The RTX 4070 SUPER has 7168 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 80 raster output units. These are not directly comparable numbers across architectures, but the scale of difference is clear.

Ray tracing and tensor core counts also diverge. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has 14 ray tracing cores and 56 tensor cores. The RTX 4070 SUPER has 56 ray tracing cores and 224 tensor cores. Both chips implement these units, but the RTX 4070 SUPER provides four times the ray tracing hardware and four times the tensor core count. The FP32 and FP16 throughput figures reflect this: the RTX 3050 A Mobile delivers 4.813 TFLOPS in both precision modes (1:1 ratio), while the RTX 4070 SUPER delivers 35.48 TFLOPS in both, again at a 1:1 ratio. The pixel rate for the RTX 3050 A Mobile is 42.98 GPixel/s, while the RTX 4070 SUPER reaches 198.0 GPixel/s. Texture rate follows the same pattern: 75.21 GTexel/s versus 554.4 GTexel/s.

The memory systems are entirely different. The RTX 3050 A Mobile uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, with 192.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 4070 SUPER uses 12 GB of GDDR6X on a 192-bit bus, with 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth. Memory clock rates also differ: 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) for the RTX 3050 A Mobile versus 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective) for the RTX 4070 SUPER. The effective data rate on the RTX 4070 SUPER is nearly double, and the wider bus adds further bandwidth.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear hierarchy. The RTX 4070 SUPER outperforms the RTX 3050 A Mobile in every single benchmark recorded, with deltas ranging from 50% to 74.2%. The RTX 4070 SUPER's average benchmark score of 43223 places it in the 83rd percentile of all GPUs, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile sits at 8746, in the 44th percentile. The RTX 3050 A Mobile's nearest rivals are older or low-end parts like the GTX 460 v2 and the Quadro P2200, while the RTX 4070 SUPER competes with high-end workstation and mobile parts like the Quadro M6000 24 GB and the RTX 4090 Mobile.

The RTX 4070 SUPER is the only sensible choice for any workload that demands high compute throughput, modern ray tracing, or substantial memory bandwidth. The RTX 3050 A Mobile might suffice for light duties given its 45 W TDP and integrated form factor, but the recorded benchmarks show it trailing by wide margins across the board. Users who need raw performance should select the RTX 4070 SUPER; users constrained to a low-power integrated mobile solution would have to accept the RTX 3050 A Mobile's significant limitations. The data does not support any scenario where the RTX 3050 A Mobile wins a performance comparison.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The RTX 3050 A Mobile uses the GA106 chip on an 8 nm Samsung process, while the RTX 4070 SUPER uses the AD104 chip on a 5 nm TSMC process. Transistor counts are 12,000 million versus 35,800 million, and die sizes are 276 mm² versus 294 mm². The RTX 4070 SUPER has a much higher transistor density at 121.8M per mm², compared to 43.5M per mm² for the RTX 3050 A Mobile.

Clock speeds are higher on the RTX 4070 SUPER: base clock of 1980 MHz versus 1065 MHz, and boost clock of 2475 MHz versus 1343 MHz. Memory configurations are also different: the RTX 3050 A Mobile has 4 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the RTX 4070 SUPER has 12 GB GDDR6X on a 192-bit bus with 504.2 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 3050 A Mobile's memory runs at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective), while the RTX 4070 SUPER's memory runs at 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective).

Compute resources differ sharply: 1792 shading units, 56 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 14 RT cores, and 56 tensor cores for the RTX 3050 A Mobile; 7168 shading units, 224 TMUs, 80 ROPs, 56 RT cores, and 224 tensor cores for the RTX 4070 SUPER. Pixel rate is 42.98 GPixel/s versus 198.0 GPixel/s, texture rate is 75.21 GTexel/s versus 554.4 GTexel/s, and FP32/FP16 throughput is 4.813 TFLOPS versus 35.48 TFLOPS.

Power and physical characteristics differ as well. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has a 45 W TDP, an integrated form factor (IGP), no power connectors, and no specified dimensions. The RTX 4070 SUPER has a 220 W TDP, a dual-slot design, a single 16-pin power connector, a suggested PSU of 550 W, and dimensions of 267 mm length, 112 mm height, and 42 mm width. The bus interface also differs: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the RTX 3050 A Mobile versus PCIe 4.0 x16 for the RTX 4070 SUPER. Display outputs are portable device dependent for the RTX 3050 A Mobile, while the RTX 4070 SUPER offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. Release dates are also distinct: the RTX 3050 A Mobile launched on 2023-12-31, while the RTX 4070 SUPER launched on 2024-01-16.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4070 SUPER wins every benchmark category in the database. For compute-heavy workloads, the passmark_gpu_compute and Geekbench OpenCL results show a lead of 74.2% and 69.3% respectively. For DirectX 11 and DirectX 10 gaming workloads, the RTX 4070 SUPER leads by 65.6% and 63.5%. The DirectX 12 test shows a 50% lead, which is the smallest margin but still a decisive victory. The DirectX 9 test gives the RTX 4070 SUPER a 55.8% edge. The 2D graphics test shows a 55.6% lead for the RTX 4070 SUPER.

There is no workload category in the recorded data where the RTX 3050 A Mobile comes out ahead. Its lower power draw of 45 W and integrated form factor could make it suitable for thin-and-light portable devices, but the benchmark data does not show any performance advantage. The RTX 3050 A Mobile's best result relative to the RTX 4070 SUPER is in DirectX 12, where it reaches half the score of the newer GPU. In absolute terms, the RTX 3050 A Mobile's scores are closer to the GTX 460 v2 and Quadro P2200, which are its nearest rivals in the database. The RTX 4070 SUPER, by contrast, sits alongside the Quadro M6000 24 GB and RTX 4090 Mobile in its performance class.

The use-case split is therefore straightforward: any application that benefits from higher FP32 throughput, faster pixel fill, larger memory bandwidth, or more ray tracing hardware should use the RTX 4070 SUPER. The RTX 3050 A Mobile only makes sense in a system where the 45 W TDP and IGP form factor are hard constraints, and where the user accepts the measured performance levels documented in the database. The data does not show any scenario where the RTX 3050 A Mobile delivers a competitive result against the RTX 4070 SUPER.