NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile vs NVIDIA N1X 40SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile and the NVIDIA N1X 40SM. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and both win counters sit at zero. This absence of comparative measurements means that any performance assessment must rely on the individual benchmark scores for the RTX 3050 A Mobile and the architectural projections for the N1X 40SM.

The RTX 3050 A Mobile has a full set of recorded measurements. Its Geekbench OpenCL score reaches 52998, while Passmark results show 11664 in G3D, 4419 in GPU compute, 526 in G2D, 152 in DirectX 9, 94 in DirectX 11, 61 in DirectX 10, and 55 in DirectX 12. The average benchmark score across these tests is 8746, placing the GPU at the 44th percentile of all recorded GPUs.

The N1X 40SM has no benchmark entries in the database. Its average benchmark score is recorded as 0, and its percentile rank sits at 50. This percentile value, despite the absence of direct measurements, suggests the database positions it near the median of all GPUs based on its architectural characteristics rather than empirical test results.

The nearest rivals for the RTX 3050 A Mobile provide context for its recorded performance. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 posts an average score of 8743, a delta of 0% from the RTX 3050 A Mobile. The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 scores 8686, which is 0.7% lower. The AMD Radeon R9 M265X reaches 8851, putting it 1.2% above the RTX 3050 A Mobile. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 scores 8863, 1.3% higher. These narrow deltas indicate the RTX 3050 A Mobile sits within a tight performance cluster where no single rival dominates by more than roughly one percentage point.

The N1X 40SM has no nearest rivals listed, so no direct comparative statements can be made from recorded data. However, its raw specifications suggest a fundamentally different performance tier. The shading unit count of 5120 versus 1792, the texture rate of 750.7 GTexel/s versus 75.21 GTexel/s, and the FP32 throughput of 24.02 TFLOPS versus 4.813 TFLOPS all point to a large performance gap in the N1X 40SM's favor, though these figures come from the specification fields rather than benchmark measurements.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 40SM records an FP32 throughput of 24.02 TFLOPS, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile records 4.813 TFLOPS. The N1X 40SM delivers approximately five times the raw single-precision compute performance, a difference driven by its 5120 shading units compared to 1792.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding 192.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The N1X 40SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, yielding 273.2 GB/s. The N1X 40SM offers 32 times the capacity and roughly 42% more bandwidth.

Q: What are the API support differences?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1X 40SM records N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, indicating the database has no confirmed API compatibility data for it.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel rate?

A: The N1X 40SM records a pixel rate of 93.84 GPixel/s, more than double the RTX 3050 A Mobile's 42.98 GPixel/s. This reflects the N1X 40SM's 40 ROPs versus 32, combined with its higher boost clock of 2346 MHz versus 1343 MHz.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile is marked as end-of-life with a release date of 2023-12-31, while the N1X 40SM is marked as active with a release date of 2026-05-31. The N1X 40SM is a newer, currently produced part.

Q: Do the benchmark scores place the RTX 3050 A Mobile above or below its nearest rivals?

A: The recorded data shows a near tie. The RTX 3050 A Mobile's average score of 8746 is 0.7% above the Quadro P2200, 1.2% below the Radeon R9 M265X, and 1.3% below the Radeon Pro WX 5100. The GTX 460 v2 matches it exactly at 0% delta.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from entirely different architectural generations. The RTX 3050 A Mobile uses the Ampere architecture on a GA106 chip, fabricated by Samsung on an 8 nm process. The die measures 276 mm² and contains 12,000 million transistors, giving a density of 43.5 million transistors per square millimeter. The N1X 40SM uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture on a GB20B chip, fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process. Its die is larger at 382 mm², though the transistor count is listed as unknown and the density is not recorded.

The core configurations differ substantially. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has 1792 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. It includes 14 ray tracing cores and 56 tensor cores. The N1X 40SM has 5120 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 40 ROPs, with 40 ray tracing cores and 160 tensor cores. The N1X 40SM's texture rate of 750.7 GTexel/s is nearly ten times the RTX 3050 A Mobile's 75.21 GTexel/s, reflecting the larger TMU count and higher boost clock.

Clock behavior also differs. The RTX 3050 A Mobile runs at a base of 1065 MHz and boosts to 1343 MHz. The N1X 40SM has a lower base of 741 MHz but a much higher boost of 2346 MHz. The wide gap between base and boost on the N1X 40SM suggests a design that relies heavily on thermal headroom and power delivery to reach peak performance. The N1X 40SM's memory clock is listed at 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile runs at 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective.

Both GPUs are integrated-class parts with an IGP slot width and no power connectors. The RTX 3050 A Mobile carries a 45 W TDP, while the N1X 40SM's TDP is recorded as unknown. The bus interfaces differ: the RTX 3050 A Mobile uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the N1X 40SM uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs also differ, with the RTX 3050 A Mobile listed as portable device dependent and the N1X 40SM having a single HDMI output.

The API support gap is notable. The RTX 3050 A Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1X 40SM records N/A across all three API categories, which means the database holds no confirmation of its API compatibility. This could reflect a lack of testing, a different driver model, or a product that has not yet been validated against standard graphics APIs.

The Verdict

The recorded data paints a clear picture of two GPUs serving different roles. The RTX 3050 A Mobile is a measured, benchmarked product with concrete performance numbers. It sits at the 44th percentile of all GPUs, with an average score of 8746, and its nearest rivals cluster within a 1.3% band. This is a GPU that competes in the lower-middle segment of the performance spectrum, and its scores against the GTX 460 v2, Quadro P2200, Radeon R9 M265X, and Radeon Pro WX 5100 show it holding its position without any decisive advantage.

The N1X 40SM has no benchmark data, no nearest rivals, and an average score of zero. Its percentile of 50 is the only comparative metric recorded, and it appears to be a placeholder ranking rather than a result derived from testing. The specification sheet, however, indicates a far more capable part on paper. The FP32 throughput of 24.02 TFLOPS, the 128 GB memory pool, the 256-bit bus, and the 2346 MHz boost clock place it in a different performance class entirely.

Who should choose the RTX 3050 A Mobile: anyone relying on verified benchmark results, confirmed API support, and a known power envelope. The 45 W TDP, the DirectX 12 Ultimate support, and the established performance profile make it a predictable choice for applications that need a functioning, tested GPU with documented capabilities.

Who should choose the N1X 40SM: anyone prioritizing raw architectural specifications and future readiness. The newer Blackwell 2.0 architecture, the 5 nm TSMC process, the larger die, the higher core counts, and the superior memory configuration all point to a GPU designed for substantially heavier workloads. The lack of benchmark data and API support records makes it a riskier selection for immediate deployment, but the specification sheet suggests it will outperform the RTX 3050 A Mobile by a wide margin once validated.

The data does not support a single recommendation for all users. It supports a split decision based on whether measured results or architectural potential carry more weight in the selection process.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs in the database:

• Architecture: Ampere versus Blackwell 2.0
• Chip: GA106 versus GB20B
• Process node: 8 nm versus 5 nm
• Foundry: Samsung versus TSMC
• Transistors: 12,000 million versus unknown
• Die size: 276 mm² versus 382 mm²
• Transistor density: 43.5M / mm² versus not recorded
• Base clock: 1065 MHz versus 741 MHz
• Boost clock: 1343 MHz versus 2346 MHz
• Memory clock: 1500 MHz 12 Gbps effective versus 1067 MHz 8.5 Gbps effective
• Memory size: 4 GB versus 128 GB
• Memory type: GDDR6 versus LPDDR5X
• Memory bus width: 128 bit versus 256 bit
• Memory bandwidth: 192.0 GB/s versus 273.2 GB/s
• Shading units: 1792 versus 5120
• TMUs: 56 versus 320
• ROPs: 32 versus 40
• Ray tracing cores: 14 versus 40
• Tensor cores: 56 versus 160
• Pixel rate: 42.98 GPixel/s versus 93.84 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 75.21 GTexel/s versus 750.7 GTexel/s
• FP32: 4.813 TFLOPS versus 24.02 TFLOPS
• FP16: 4.813 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 24.02 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 45 W versus unknown
• Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 5.0 x16
• Display outputs: Portable Device Dependent versus 1x HDMI
• DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus N/A
• OpenGL support: 4.6 versus N/A
• Vulkan support: 1.4 versus N/A
• Production status: End-of-life versus Active
• Release date: 2023-12-31 versus 2026-05-31
• Benchmark scores: eight recorded entries versus none
• Percentile: 44 versus 50
• Average benchmark score: 8746 versus 0
• Nearest rivals: four listed versus none