NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile vs NVIDIA Quadro K4100M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data splits these two mobile graphics processors into very different roles. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile is the clear winner in compute-oriented workloads, dominating the only shared benchmark test. The NVIDIA Quadro K4100M, meanwhile, has no benchmark wins in the head-to-head comparison, but its existence in a different class of hardware suggests a different intended environment.

Looking at the shared test results, the RTX 3050 A Mobile takes the OpenCL workload decisively. It scores 52,998 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the Quadro K4100M manages only 9,149. That is a 479.3% advantage for the newer part. The delta is so large that it is not a marginal victory but a categorical shift in compute capability.

The Quadro K4100M does have one benchmark entry that the RTX 3050 A Mobile does not have in the database: a Geekbench Metal score of 6,662. This is not a head-to-head comparison, but it indicates that the older Quadro can still execute certain workloads, just not at the level of the newer architecture.

The RTX 3050 A Mobile also holds a substantial overall average benchmark score advantage. Its average sits at 8,746, while the Quadro K4100M averages 7,906. That difference of roughly 10.6% in the aggregate places the two cards in different performance tiers despite both being end-of-life products.

Percentile rankings reinforce the split. The RTX 3050 A Mobile sits at the 44th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the Quadro K4100M rests at the 41st percentile. Neither is a top-tier part, but the newer Ampere-based solution is measurably ahead in the tasks it can accelerate.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different design eras and foundries. The RTX 3050 A Mobile uses the GA106 chip built on Samsung's 8 nm process, featuring Ampere architecture. The Quadro K4100M uses the GK104 chip built on TSMC's 28 nm process, featuring Kepler architecture. The transistor counts tell the story of how much changed between generations: the Ampere part packs 12,000 million transistors, while the Kepler part has only 3,540 million.

Die sizes are surprisingly close. The GA106 die measures 276 mm², while the GK104 die is slightly larger at 294 mm². The transistor density difference is enormous, however. The RTX 3050 A Mobile reaches 43.5 million transistors per square millimeter, whereas the Quadro K4100M achieves only 12.0 million per square millimeter. That density advantage is the foundation for the performance gap.

Clock speeds also differ substantially. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has a base clock of 1065 MHz and a boost clock of 1343 MHz. The Quadro K4100M runs at a flat 706 MHz for both base and boost, meaning it has no dynamic overclocking headroom in the recorded specifications.

Memory configurations share the same 4 GB capacity but diverge elsewhere. The RTX 3050 A Mobile uses GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 192.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro K4100M uses GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 102.4 GB/s. The newer part achieves nearly double the bandwidth despite having half the bus width, thanks to faster memory technology.

The shading unit counts differ meaningfully: 1,792 on the RTX 3050 A Mobile versus 1,152 on the Quadro K4100M. Texture mapping units favor the older card, with 96 versus 56, but the newer card doubles the pixel throughput at 42.98 GPixel/s versus 16.94 GPixel/s. The Ampere part also brings hardware features the Kepler part lacks entirely: 14 ray tracing cores and 56 tensor cores.

Power requirements diverge sharply. The RTX 3050 A Mobile draws 45 W and is an integrated graphics processor with no power connectors. The Quadro K4100M draws 100 W and comes as an MXM module. The newer card delivers more performance at less than half the power draw.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records only one shared benchmark between these two cards, and it is not close. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 52,998 against the Quadro K4100M's 9,149. That is a 479.3% delta, meaning the newer card is nearly six times faster in this compute workload.

To put that in perspective, look at the nearest rivals for each card. The RTX 3050 A Mobile's closest competitors in the database are the GeForce GTX 460 v2 at 8,743 average score, the Quadro P2200 at 8,686, the Radeon R9 M265X at 8,851, and the Radeon Pro WX 5100 at 8,863. Its average score of 8,746 places it squarely in that group, within a range of about 1.3% below the best of those rivals.

The Quadro K4100M's nearest rivals are the GeForce GTX 460 at 7,925 average score, the Quadro P5000 at 8,039, the GeForce GTX 880M at 8,040, and the GeForce GTX 650 Ti at 8,053. Its average of 7,906 sits about 1.8% below the best of that group. The two cards occupy neighboring performance neighborhoods in terms of average scores, yet the OpenCL result shows a much wider gulf in compute-specific tasks.

The individual benchmark scores for the RTX 3050 A Mobile reveal its versatility: 61 in Passmark DirectX 10, 94 in DirectX 11, 55 in DirectX 12, 152 in DirectX 9, 526 in Passmark G2D, 11,664 in G3D, and 4,419 in GPU compute. The G3D score of 11,664 is particularly strong relative to its average, indicating that traditional graphics workloads are a relative strength.

The Quadro K4100M lacks those DirectX and G3D entries in the database, so a direct comparison across graphics APIs is not possible from the recorded data. Its Metal score of 6,662 and OpenCL score of 9,149 are the only performance data points available.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile is dramatically faster, scoring 52,998 versus 9,149 for the Quadro K4100M, a 479.3% advantage.

Q: Do both cards have the same amount of memory?

A: Yes, both have 4 GB, but the RTX 3050 A Mobile uses GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus for 192.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Quadro K4100M uses GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus for 102.4 GB/s.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile draws 45 W and is an IGP with no power connectors. The Quadro K4100M draws 100 W and is an MXM module, also with no power connectors.

Q: Does the Quadro K4100M support ray tracing?

A: No. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has 14 ray tracing cores and 56 tensor cores. The Quadro K4100M has neither, as its Kepler architecture predates those features.

Q: How do their overall average benchmark scores compare?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile averages 8,746, while the Quadro K4100M averages 7,906. The newer card holds a roughly 10.6% advantage in the aggregate.

Q: Which card has better API support?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Quadro K4100M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear recommendation for anyone choosing between these two for compute-heavy mobile workloads. The RTX 3050 A Mobile offers nearly six times the OpenCL performance, twice the memory bandwidth, and higher transistor density, all while drawing less than half the power. Its 45 W TDP versus 100 W makes it the more practical choice for modern mobile designs.

The Quadro K4100M does retain some relevance in the database. Its 256-bit memory bus and 96 texture mapping units are specs that once defined a professional mobile GPU. However, with no head-to-head wins and an average score about 10.6% lower, the recorded data shows it falling behind on every measurable shared metric.

The RTX 3050 A Mobile's launch MSRP is not recorded in the database, so no pricing comparison is possible from this data. The Quadro K4100M carries a launch MSRP of 1,499 USD, but that reflects its 2013 market position rather than current value.

For those running modern compute workloads, the choice is unambiguous: the RTX 3050 A Mobile. For legacy compatibility or Metal-specific tasks, the Quadro K4100M still has a place, but that place is narrow.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile | NVIDIA Quadro K4100M |

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

| Architecture | Ampere | Kepler |

| Process node | 8 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | Samsung | TSMC |

| Transistors | 12,000 million | 3,540 million |

| Die size | 276 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor density | 43.5M / mm² | 12.0M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1065 MHz | 706 MHz |

| Boost clock | 1343 MHz | 706 MHz |

| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory bus width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 192.0 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| Shading units | 1792 | 1152 |

| TMUs | 56 | 96 |

| ROPs | 32 | 32 |

| Ray tracing cores | 14 | null |

| Tensor cores | 56 | null |

| Pixel rate | 42.98 GPixel/s | 16.94 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 75.21 GTexel/s | 67.78 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.813 TFLOPS | 1.627 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 4.813 TFLOPS (1:1) | null |

| TDP | 45 W | 100 W |

| Slot width | IGP | MXM Module |

| Bus interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | MXM-B (3.0) |

| DirectX support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan support | 1.4 | 1.2.175 |

| Release date | 2023-12-31 | 2013-07-22 |

| Successor | null | Quadro Maxwell-M |