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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep: the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER wins all eight direct comparisons, with the RTX 3050 A Mobile never taking a single head-to-head test. The largest gap appears in Passmark GPU Compute, where the 4070 Ti SUPER scores 18,372 versus 4,419 for the 3050 A, a delta of -75.9% for the smaller part. That compute delta is the most severe margin in the entire set, reflecting a fundamental difference in raw arithmetic throughput.

The Geekbench OpenCL result follows a similar pattern. The 4070 Ti SUPER posts 199,267 against the 3050 A’s 52,998, a -73.4% difference. This is the second-largest proportional gap and indicates that the newer card’s advantage extends beyond graphics-specific workloads into general GPU compute. The Passmark DirectX 10 test shows a -66.3% delta (181 versus 61), and DirectX 11 shows -66.2% (278 versus 94). Both are nearly identical in proportional terms, suggesting the architectural gains apply consistently across older API versions.

DirectX 12 narrows the proportional gap somewhat. The 4070 Ti SUPER scores 119, the 3050 A scores 55, a -53.8% delta. DirectX 9 shows a -57.8% delta (360 versus 152). The 2D test, Passmark G2D, delivers a -57.1% delta (1,225 versus 526). The 3D test, Passmark G3D, shows a -63.3% delta (31,811 versus 11,664). Across the board, every delta falls between -53.8% and -75.9%, meaning the 4070 Ti SUPER is at minimum more than twice as fast in every recorded benchmark, and in compute nearly four times as fast.

The average benchmark score confirms the hierarchy. The 4070 Ti SUPER averages 31,087, while the 3050 A averages 8,746. The percentile rankings place the 4070 Ti SUPER at the 76th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the 44th percentile for the 3050 A. In context, the 4070 Ti SUPER’s nearest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA Quadro M5000 (average 31,206, -0.4% delta), the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q (31,220, -0.4%), the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell (31,532, -1.4%), and the NVIDIA TITAN RTX (31,676, -1.9%). The 3050 A’s nearest rivals are far weaker: the GTX 460 v2 (8,743, 0% delta), the Quadro P2200 (8,686, +0.7%), the Radeon R9 M265X (8,851, -1.2%), and the Radeon Pro WX 5100 (8,863, -1.3%).

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the most benchmarks in this comparison?

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER wins all eight head-to-head tests. The RTX 3050 A Mobile wins zero.

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

The Passmark GPU Compute test shows the largest delta, with the 4070 Ti SUPER scoring 18,372 against the 3050 A’s 4,419, a -75.9% difference for the 3050 A.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

The 4070 Ti SUPER averages 31,087, while the 3050 A averages 8,746. The 4070 Ti SUPER sits at the 76th percentile of all GPUs; the 3050 A sits at the 44th percentile.

Q: Is the RTX 3050 A Mobile close to any other GPU in the database?

Its nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2, with an average score of 8,743, a 0% delta. The Quadro P2200 is 0.7% ahead, the Radeon R9 M265X is -1.2% behind, and the Radeon Pro WX 5100 is -1.3% behind.

Q: What is the closest head-to-head result in proportional terms?

The Passmark DirectX 12 test has the smallest delta, -53.8% (119 versus 55). Even this closest result still leaves the 3050 A at less than half the score.

Q: Does the 4070 Ti SUPER trail any of its nearest rivals?

The data shows it is 0.4% behind the Quadro M5000 and the GRID M60-1Q, 1.4% behind the RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell, and 1.9% behind the TITAN RTX. These are all minor negative deltas, indicating the 4070 Ti SUPER is competitive with those cards but not the absolute leader in its immediate peer group.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs belong to different NVIDIA architectures. The RTX 3050 A Mobile uses the GA106 chip on the Ampere architecture, built on an 8 nm process at Samsung. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER uses the AD103 chip on the Ada Lovelace architecture, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. That process difference is substantial: the 4070 Ti SUPER packs 45,900 million transistors into a 379 mm² die, while the 3050 A contains 12,000 million transistors on a 276 mm² die. Transistor density reflects this: 121.1M per mm² for the 4070 Ti SUPER versus 43.5M per mm² for the 3050 A.

The chip-level differences extend to every compute unit. The 4070 Ti SUPER has 8,448 shading units, 264 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 66 RT cores, and 264 tensor cores. The 3050 A has 1,792 shading units, 56 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 14 RT cores, and 56 tensor cores. The ratio of shading units is 4.7 to 1; the ratio of tensor cores is also 4.7 to 1. RT cores differ by a factor of 4.7 as well, while ROPs differ by a factor of 3.

The memory architecture is also different in kind. The 3050 A uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 4070 Ti SUPER uses 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, yielding 672.3 GB/s. That is 3.5 times the bandwidth and four times the capacity. The memory clock differs as well: 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) on the 3050 A versus 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective) on the 4070 Ti SUPER. The effective data rate is the key difference, not the raw clock.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so the API feature set is identical. The bus interface differs: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the 3050 A versus PCIe 4.0 x16 for the 4070 Ti SUPER. The 3050 A is an integrated graphics package (IGP) with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs. The 4070 Ti SUPER is a triple-slot card, 310 mm long, 140 mm high, 61 mm wide, with a single 16-pin power connector and a suggested PSU of 600 W.

Specification Differences

The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER leads in every major specification category. Its base clock is 2340 MHz versus 1065 MHz for the 3050 A, and its boost clock is 2610 MHz versus 1343 MHz. FP32 throughput is 44.10 TFLOPS versus 4.813 TFLOPS, a 9.2 to 1 ratio. FP16 runs at the same 1:1 ratio on both, so the FP16 figures match the FP32 figures exactly. Pixel rate is 250.6 GPixel/s versus 42.98 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 689.0 GTexel/s versus 75.21 GTexel/s.

Memory specifications differ sharply. The 4070 Ti SUPER has 16 GB of GDDR6X with a 256-bit bus and 672.3 GB/s bandwidth. The 3050 A has 4 GB of GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus and 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The TDP also differs: 285 W for the 4070 Ti SUPER versus 45 W for the 3050 A, a 6.3 to 1 ratio in power draw. The slot width differs (triple-slot versus IGP), as do the power connectors (1x 16-pin versus none) and the bus interface (x16 versus x8).

The release dates are close in the database: the 3050 A launched on December 31, 2023, and the 4070 Ti SUPER launched on January 23, 2024. Both are marked end-of-life. The 4070 Ti SUPER has a listed launch MSRP of 799 USD, while the 3050 A has no listed MSRP. The 4070 Ti SUPER’s predecessor is GeForce 30 and its successor is GeForce 50; the 3050 A’s predecessor is GeForce 20 Mobile and it has no successor listed.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER outperforms the RTX 3050 A Mobile in every recorded test, with deltas ranging from -53.8% to -75.9% in favor of the larger card. The average score gap is 31,087 versus 8,746, a 3.55 to 1 ratio. The percentile placement (76th versus 44th) confirms that the 4070 Ti SUPER belongs in a much higher performance class.

For a user selecting between these two, the choice depends entirely on the workload and the system constraints. The 3050 A draws 45 W and requires no external power connectors, making it suitable for portable devices where the 4070 Ti SUPER’s 285 W TDP and triple-slot footprint would be impossible. The 4070 Ti SUPER, with its 16 GB of GDDR6X and 672.3 GB/s bandwidth, is the superior choice for any graphics-heavy or compute-heavy application that can accommodate its physical size and power requirements.

The 4070 Ti SUPER’s nearest rivals in the database (Quadro M5000, GRID M60-1Q, RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell, TITAN RTX) all sit within 1.9% of its average score, meaning it is a mid-tier-to-high-tier performer among its peers. The 3050 A’s nearest rivals (GTX 460 v2, Quadro P2200, Radeon R9 M265X, Radeon Pro WX 5100) are all old or low-end parts, and the 3050 A sits within 1.3% of them. This places the 3050 A at the low end of the database’s performance spectrum.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER wins every benchmark category recorded. Its largest margin is in Passmark GPU Compute (18,372 versus 4,419, -75.9%), which makes it the clear choice for compute-heavy tasks such as rendering, simulations, or any workload that exercises raw FP32 throughput. Its Geekbench OpenCL margin (-73.4%) reinforces this, showing that the advantage persists in open-standard compute APIs.

The 4070 Ti SUPER also wins decisively across all DirectX versions. DirectX 10 (-66.3%), DirectX 11 (-66.2%), DirectX 9 (-57.8%), and DirectX 12 (-53.8%) all favor the larger card. The 2D test (-57.1%) and the 3D test (-63.3%) also favor it. There is no recorded test where the 3050 A takes a win.

The RTX 3050 A Mobile’s only advantages are not in performance but in system integration. It is an IGP with no power connectors, a 45 W TDP, and portable-device-dependent display outputs. It fits in systems where a 285 W, triple-slot, 310 mm card cannot. The data does not show any benchmark where the 3050 A is faster, so its selection is a matter of physical and thermal constraints, not measured performance. For any system that can accommodate the 4070 Ti SUPER, the recorded benchmarks show it is the faster choice in every single test.