NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits decisively along performance tiers. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER wins all eight recorded head-to-head tests, with no benchmark favoring the RTX 3050 A Mobile. The RTX 4080 SUPER's average benchmark score of 54209 places it at the 86th percentile among all GPUs, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile averages 8746, sitting at the 44th percentile. This places the two cards in entirely different performance brackets, separated by roughly sixfold in aggregate compute output.

For the RTX 3050 A Mobile, the use case centers on portable, low-power systems. Its 45 W TDP and IGP slot width indicate integration directly into thin notebooks where space and thermal limits dominate. The card targets basic DirectX 9 and DirectX 10 workloads, where its passmark scores of 152 and 61 respectively show modest but usable legacy performance. It also handles 2D desktop tasks with a passmark_g2d score of 526. The RTX 4080 SUPER, conversely, targets high-end desktop or large-form-factor laptop configurations. Its triple-slot width, 16-pin power connector, and 700 W suggested PSU position it for sustained high-load gaming and compute. Its passmark_g3d score of 34245 and passmark_gpu_compute score of 19822 indicate it delivers roughly three to four and a half times the raw graphics and compute throughput of the mobile chip.

The RTX 4080 SUPER also wins on memory capacity and bandwidth. It carries 16 GB of GDDR6X across a 256-bit bus, delivering 736.3 GB/s. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, providing 192.0 GB/s. That 544.3 GB/s difference directly impacts texture-heavy scenes, high-resolution rendering, and large dataset compute workloads. For users running modern DirectX 12 Ultimate titles at high settings, the RTX 4080 SUPER's 134 passmark_directx_12 score versus the RTX 3050 A Mobile's 55 shows a 59% gap in favor of the larger card.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER averages 54209, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile averages 8746. That represents a 520% difference in aggregate performance.

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

A: The database lists the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 as the closest match at 8743 average score (0% delta). The AMD Radeon R9 M265X scores 8851, which is 1.2% higher. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 scores 8863, 1.3% higher. The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 scores 8686, 0.7% lower.

Q: What is the performance gap in compute workloads?

A: In passmark_gpu_compute, the RTX 4080 SUPER scores 19822 versus 4419 for the RTX 3050 A Mobile, a 77.7% margin favoring the larger card.

Q: Which card supports more memory and faster memory?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER has 16 GB of GDDR6X with 736.3 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has 4 GB of GDDR6 with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the RTX 3050 A Mobile wins?

A: No. Across all eight head-to-head tests, the RTX 4080 SUPER wins every category. The RTX 3050 A Mobile records zero wins.

Q: What is the DirectX 12 performance difference?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER scores 134 in passmark_directx_12, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 55. The RTX 4080 SUPER leads by 59%.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single-test margin appears in passmark_gpu_compute. The RTX 4080 SUPER scores 19822 against 4419 for the RTX 3050 A Mobile, a 77.7% advantage. This reflects the massive difference in shading units (10240 versus 1792), texture mapping units (320 versus 56), and tensor cores (320 versus 56). Compute-heavy applications such as rendering, simulation, and machine learning inference will see roughly fourfold throughput on the RTX 4080 SUPER.

The next biggest gap is in geekbench_opencl, where the RTX 4080 SUPER posts 219065 versus 52998 for the RTX 3050 A Mobile, a 75.8% delta. OpenCL performance often scales with memory bandwidth and raw FP32 throughput, and the RTX 4080 SUPER delivers 52.22 TFLOPS FP32 versus 4.813 TFLOPS for the mobile chip. That 10.8x theoretical compute advantage translates into the observed benchmark gap, though real-world scaling rarely reaches theoretical peaks.

In passmark_directx_10, the RTX 4080 SUPER scores 193 versus 61 for the RTX 3050 A Mobile, a 68.4% difference. DirectX 11 shows a similar pattern: 301 versus 94, a 68.8% gap. Legacy DirectX 9 performance is closer in relative terms but still heavily favors the RTX 4080 SUPER: 381 versus 152, a 60.1% margin. The smallest head-to-head gap is passmark_directx_12 at 59%, where the RTX 4080 SUPER scores 134 and the RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 55. Even in the card's weakest relative category, the RTX 4080 SUPER still leads by more than double.

The 2D performance test, passmark_g2d, shows the RTX 4080 SUPER at 1270 versus 526 for the RTX 3050 A Mobile, a 58.6% gap. This metric captures desktop compositing, video playback, and basic UI rendering. The gap exists partly because the RTX 4080 SUPER's 112 ROPs handle pixel output at 285.6 GPixel/s, versus 32 ROPs and 42.98 GPixel/s for the RTX 3050 A Mobile.

The passmark_g3d aggregate score, which combines multiple DirectX tests, gives the RTX 4080 SUPER a 34245 result against 11664 for the RTX 3050 A Mobile, a 65.9% difference. That places the RTX 4080 SUPER at nearly triple the overall graphics performance of the mobile chip. For gaming, this means the RTX 4080 SUPER can sustain high frame rates at higher resolutions and detail settings, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile is limited to lower settings and older titles.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across every major specification category. The RTX 3050 A Mobile uses the GA106 chip on Samsung's 8 nm process, while the RTX 4080 SUPER uses the AD103 chip on TSMC's 5 nm process. Transistor counts differ substantially: 12,000 million for the mobile chip versus 45,900 million for the desktop card. Die sizes are 276 mm² versus 379 mm², giving transistor densities of 43.5M per mm² and 121.1M per mm² respectively.

Memory configurations are entirely different. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has 4 GB GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus and 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4080 SUPER has 16 GB GDDR6X with a 256-bit bus and 736.3 GB/s bandwidth. Clock speeds also differ: the RTX 3050 A Mobile bases at 1065 MHz and boosts to 1343 MHz, while the RTX 4080 SUPER bases at 2295 MHz and boosts to 2550 MHz. Memory clocks are 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) versus 1438 MHz (23 Gbps effective).

Compute resources show a wide gap. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has 1792 shading units, 56 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 14 RT cores, and 56 tensor cores. The RTX 4080 SUPER has 10240 shading units, 320 TMUs, 112 ROPs, 80 RT cores, and 320 tensor cores. Pixel rate is 42.98 GPixel/s versus 285.6 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 75.21 GTexel/s versus 816.0 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 performance are both 4.813 TFLOPS for the mobile chip and 52.22 TFLOPS for the desktop card.

Power and physical specifications diverge sharply. The RTX 3050 A Mobile draws 45 W and uses an IGP slot width with no power connectors. The RTX 4080 SUPER draws 320 W, uses a triple-slot design with a 1x 16-pin connector, and requires a 700 W suggested PSU. The RTX 4080 SUPER measures 310 mm in length, 140 mm in height, and 61 mm in width. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has no recorded dimensions, consistent with its integrated mobile nature. Bus interfaces differ as well: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the mobile chip versus PCIe 4.0 x16 for the desktop card. Display outputs are portable-device-dependent for the mobile chip, while the RTX 4080 SUPER provides 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Architecture Differences

The RTX 3050 A Mobile belongs to the GeForce 30-series based on Ampere architecture. The RTX 4080 SUPER belongs to the GeForce 40-series based on Ada Lovelace architecture. These represent two distinct GPU generations with different design priorities. Ampere, built on Samsung's 8 nm process, focuses on efficiency and ray tracing support for mobile and mainstream desktop parts. Ada Lovelace, built on TSMC's 5 nm process, emphasizes higher transistor density and significantly improved compute throughput.

The RT core counts differ by 5.7x: 14 RT cores on the mobile chip versus 80 on the desktop card. Tensor core counts differ similarly: 56 versus 320. These ratios align with the shading unit difference of 5.7x (1792 versus 10240). The architecture generations also differ in their ray tracing capabilities, with Ada Lovelace introducing newer RT core designs that handle traversal and intersection more efficiently per core. The RTX 4080 SUPER's 80 RT cores, combined with higher clock speeds, provide substantially better ray-traced performance, though no dedicated ray tracing benchmark appears in the recorded data.

The memory subsystem reflects architectural choices as well. The RTX 4080 SUPER uses GDDR6X, which achieves higher effective data rates (23 Gbps versus 12 Gbps) and wider bus width (256-bit versus 128-bit). This results in 736.3 GB/s versus 192.0 GB/s, a 3.8x bandwidth advantage. The Ada Lovelace architecture also supports larger L2 caches per SM, though specific cache sizes are not recorded in the database.

Both GPUs share the same API support: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. This means both can run the same modern graphics APIs and feature sets, but the RTX 4080 SUPER has the hardware resources to use those APIs at much higher performance levels. The RTX 3050 A Mobile's predecessor is listed as GeForce 20 Mobile, while the RTX 4080 SUPER's predecessor is GeForce 30. The RTX 4080 SUPER has a successor in GeForce 50, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile has none listed. Both are marked end-of-life in production status.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear performance hierarchy: the RTX 4080 SUPER dominates every benchmark category, with margins ranging from 58.6% in 2D tests to 77.7% in compute workloads. Its average benchmark score of 54209 versus 8746 for the RTX 3050 A Mobile places them at the 86th and 44th percentiles respectively. This is not a close comparison; it is a comparison between a low-power integrated mobile GPU and a high-end desktop-class part.

For users working with the RTX 3050 A Mobile, the correct expectation is legacy gaming, basic productivity, and 2D workloads. Its passmark_directx_9 score of 152 and passmark_directx_10 score of 61 indicate it can handle older titles and lightweight applications. Its 45 W TDP and IGP form factor make it suitable for thin-and-light notebooks where battery life and thermals matter more than raw performance. The 4 GB memory capacity limits it to lower resolution textures and less demanding scenes.

For the RTX 4080 SUPER, the data supports high-end gaming, content creation, and compute tasks. Its passmark_g3d score of 34245 and passmark_gpu_compute score of 19822 indicate it can drive modern DirectX 12 titles at high settings and handle GPU-accelerated workloads. The 16 GB memory capacity and 736.3 GB/s bandwidth provide headroom for large textures, high resolutions, and multi-tasking. The 320 W TDP and triple-slot design require a substantial chassis and cooling solution, which the 700 W suggested PSU accommodates.

Users should choose based on their physical platform and performance needs. The RTX 3050 A Mobile only appears in portable devices with integrated GPUs, so the choice is often predetermined by the laptop design. The RTX 4080 SUPER, with its launch MSRP of 999 USD, targets desktop builders and high-end laptop manufacturers seeking maximum performance. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has no launch MSRP recorded, reflecting its role as an OEM component rather than a retail product.

The RTX 4080 SUPER's nearest rival is the RTX 4080, which scores 54247 average, a 0.1% delta. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X scores 54828, 1.1% higher. The AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB scores 55698, 2.7% higher. The AMD Radeon 8060S scores 55757, 2.8% higher. The RTX 3050 A Mobile's nearest rival is the GTX 460 v2 at 8743 average score, with the Quadro P2200 at 8686 (0.7% lower), the R9 M265X at 8851 (1.2% higher), and the Pro WX 5100 at 8863 (1.3% higher). These rival sets confirm that each card competes in entirely different performance strata.