NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile vs NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation Comparison

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile and NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation occupy different segments of the mobile GPU landscape, with the former being an end-of-life consumer part and the latter an active embedded offering. The recorded database shows the RTX 3050 A Mobile has an average benchmark score of 8746 and sits at the 44th percentile among all GPUs, while the RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation has no recorded benchmark scores and holds a 50th percentile ranking based on its specification profile. The benchmark data for the RTX 3050 A Mobile provides concrete measurements across multiple tests, whereas the RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation's performance must be inferred from its architecture and clock specifications alone. This analysis walks through the available measurements, specification differences, and architectural distinctions between the two.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3050 A Mobile has recorded wins in every benchmark category because it is the only one of the two with measured scores in the database. Its strongest results appear in Passmark G3D with a score of 11664, Geekbench OpenCL with 52998, and Passmark GPU Compute with 4419. These numbers indicate that the RTX 3050 A Mobile delivers substantial raw graphics throughput and compute capability for a 45 W mobile part. The Passmark DirectX 9 score of 152 shows solid legacy API performance, while the DirectX 11 score of 94 and DirectX 12 score of 55 demonstrate progressively lower performance under more modern API workloads. The Passmark G2D score of 526 covers 2D desktop operations, and the DirectX 10 score of 61 rounds out the API coverage.

The RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation has zero benchmark entries in the database, so no direct wins can be assigned to it. However, its specification sheet indicates a much higher theoretical ceiling. The FP32 compute rate of 12.35 TFLOPS is more than double the RTX 3050 A Mobile's 4.813 TFLOPS, and the pixel rate of 96.48 GPixel/s versus 42.98 GPixel/s suggests roughly double the rasterization throughput. The texture rate of 193.0 GTexel/s compared to 75.21 GTexel/s points to a similarly large advantage in texture-heavy workloads. These specification-level differences imply that the RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation would win in any scenario where shader throughput, ray tracing, or tensor operations dominate, but the absence of measured scores means the database cannot confirm actual results.

The RTX 3050 A Mobile wins in the only measurable category, benchmark scores, while the RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation wins on paper in raw throughput metrics. For workloads like DirectX 9 or 2D operations, the recorded scores suggest the RTX 3050 A Mobile is adequate, but the newer architecture and higher clock rates of the RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation would likely shift the balance in modern titles.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile has an average benchmark score of 8746, while the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation has no recorded benchmark scores, resulting in an average of 0.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference between the two?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128 bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128 bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do the clock speeds compare?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile has a base clock of 1065 MHz and a boost clock of 1343 MHz, while the RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation has a base clock of 1530 MHz and a boost clock of 2010 MHz.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation has 3072 shading units, compared to 1792 shading units on the RTX 3050 A Mobile.

Q: What are the production statuses?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile is marked as end-of-life, while the RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation is marked as active.

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 compute rating?

A: The RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation has an FP32 rating of 12.35 TFLOPS, which is higher than the RTX 3050 A Mobile's 4.813 TFLOPS.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark table is empty in the database, meaning there are no direct paired measurements between the two GPUs. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has eight individual benchmark entries, while the RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation has none. This limits the comparison to specification-based analysis and the RTX 3050 A Mobile's own scores.

The largest measured advantage for the RTX 3050 A Mobile in its own results is in Geekbench OpenCL, where it scores 52998, a figure that reflects strong compute throughput for a mobile part. The Passmark G3D score of 11664 places it in a competitive position among mobile GPUs from its generation. The Passmark GPU Compute score of 4419 indicates that general-purpose compute tasks are handled reasonably well. The Passmark DirectX 9 score of 152 is the highest of the DirectX tests, showing that older API workloads run efficiently. The DirectX 11 score of 94 is lower, and the DirectX 12 score of 55 is the weakest of the API tests, suggesting that the 4 GB memory capacity and 128 bit bus become limiting factors in modern titles.

Comparing to the nearest rivals in the database, the RTX 3050 A Mobile's average score of 8746 is essentially tied with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 at 8743, showing a delta of 0 percent. It is 0.7 percent ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro P2200, which scores 8686, and 1.2 percent behind the AMD Radeon R9 M265X at 8851. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 scores 8863, putting the RTX 3050 A Mobile 1.3 percent behind. These small deltas indicate that the RTX 3050 A Mobile performs at a level comparable to older desktop and mobile workstation parts, despite its newer release date.

For the RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation, the specification sheet implies a much larger performance gap. The boost clock of 2010 MHz versus 1343 MHz, combined with 3072 shading units versus 1792, and 96 texture mapping units versus 56, all point to a GPU that would outperform the RTX 3050 A Mobile by a wide margin in most workloads. The FP32 throughput of 12.35 TFLOPS versus 4.813 TFLOPS is a 2.57-fold difference, which would translate into significant gains in compute-heavy applications. The pixel rate of 96.48 GPixel/s versus 42.98 GPixel/s is a 2.24-fold difference, and the texture rate of 193.0 GTexel/s versus 75.21 GTexel/s is a 2.57-fold difference. These ratios suggest that the RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation would dominate in rasterization and texture-heavy scenarios.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measured specification. The process node is 8 nm for the RTX 3050 A Mobile, fabricated by Samsung, versus 5 nm for the RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation, fabricated by TSMC. The transistor count is 12,000 million for the RTX 3050 A Mobile and 18,900 million for the RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation, with die sizes of 276 mm² and 159 mm² respectively. The transistor density is 43.5M per mm² for the RTX 3050 A Mobile and 118.9M per mm² for the RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation, reflecting the denser 5 nm process.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The RTX 3050 A Mobile runs at 1065 MHz base and 1343 MHz boost, while the RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation runs at 1530 MHz base and 2010 MHz boost. Memory clocks are 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective for the RTX 3050 A Mobile, and 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective for the RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation. Memory size is 4 GB versus 8 GB, while the bus width is 128 bit for both. Bandwidth is 192.0 GB/s versus 256.0 GB/s.

The compute units differ across the board. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has 1792 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, 32 render output units, 14 ray tracing cores, and 56 tensor cores. The RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation has 3072 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, 48 render output units, 24 ray tracing cores, and 96 tensor cores. Pixel rate is 42.98 GPixel/s versus 96.48 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 75.21 GTexel/s versus 193.0 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 both show 4.813 TFLOPS for the RTX 3050 A Mobile and 12.35 TFLOPS for the RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation.

Thermal design power is 45 W for the RTX 3050 A Mobile and 50 W for the RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation. Both are integrated into the package with no power connectors. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 for the RTX 3050 A Mobile and PCIe 4.0 x16 for the RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation. Display outputs are portable device dependent for both. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has no launch MSRP recorded, and the RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation also has no launch MSRP recorded.

Architecture Differences

The RTX 3050 A Mobile uses the GA106 chip based on the Ampere architecture, part of the GeForce 30 Mobile generation. The RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation uses the AD107 chip based on the Ada Lovelace architecture, part of the Ada-MW generation. The Ampere architecture is built on an 8 nm Samsung process, while Ada Lovelace uses a 5 nm TSMC process. The die size for GA106 is 276 mm², whereas AD107 is 159 mm², a smaller die that packs more transistors due to the denser process.

The RTX 3050 A Mobile has 14 ray tracing cores and 56 tensor cores, while the RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation has 24 ray tracing cores and 96 tensor cores. The Ada Lovelace architecture includes improved ray tracing and tensor processing capabilities compared to Ampere, though the database does not specify the exact feature differences. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so the API surface is identical.

The RTX 3050 A Mobile was released on 2023-12-31 and is marked as end-of-life, with its predecessor being the GeForce 20 Mobile series. The RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation was released on 2023-03-20 and is marked as active, with its predecessor being the Ampere-MW series and its successor being the Blackwell-MW series. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has no successor listed in the database. The production status difference is significant: one is a consumer mobile part at the end of its life, while the other is an embedded part still in active production.

The transistor density difference, 43.5M per mm² versus 118.9M per mm², reflects the generational leap in manufacturing. The RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation achieves higher clock speeds and higher throughput while consuming only 5 W more power, 50 W versus 45 W. The power connector situation is identical, with both using no external connectors and relying on the portable device's power delivery.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows the RTX 3050 A Mobile has measurable benchmark scores with an average of 8746 and a 44th percentile ranking, placing it near older desktop GPUs like the GeForce GTX 460 v2 and Quadro P2200. Its 4 GB memory and 192.0 GB/s bandwidth are modest for modern workloads, and its DirectX 12 score of 55 indicates limited headroom for current games. The RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation has no benchmark scores, but its specifications indicate a far higher performance ceiling, with 8 GB memory, 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, and more than double the FP32 throughput at 12.35 TFLOPS.

For users selecting a GPU based on measured performance, the RTX 3050 A Mobile is the only option with recorded data. Its scores in Geekbench OpenCL and Passmark G3D show it can handle compute and 3D tasks at a level comparable to older professional GPUs. For users selecting based on specification-driven capacity, the RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation offers a newer architecture, higher clocks, more memory, and greater compute resources, all within a similar power envelope of 50 W.

The RTX 3050 A Mobile suits scenarios where legacy API performance or established driver support for GeForce 30-series parts is the priority. The RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation suits scenarios where maximum compute throughput, larger memory capacity, and active production status are required. The database does not provide direct head-to-head measurements, so the final choice depends on whether the user prioritizes recorded benchmark results or specification-level capability.