NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile vs NVIDIA RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents an unusual comparison: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile has a full set of benchmark results, while the NVIDIA RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. This absence means a direct score-by-score comparison is not possible from the available measurements.

For the RTX 3050 A Mobile, the database shows a Geekbench OpenCL score of 52998. Its Passmark results include 61 in DirectX 10, 94 in DirectX 11, 55 in DirectX 12, and 152 in DirectX 9. The 2D graphics score is 526, the 3D graphics score is 11664, and the GPU compute score is 4419. The average benchmark score for this part is 8746.

That average places the RTX 3050 A Mobile at the 44th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals, based on average score, include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 with an average score of 8743 and a delta of 0%, the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 at 8686 with a delta of 0.7%, the AMD Radeon R9 M265X at 8851 with a delta of -1.2%, and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 at 8863 with a delta of -1.3%. These small deltas indicate that the RTX 3050 A Mobile sits in a tightly contested performance band, with the largest gap among these rivals being just over one percent.

The RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation has an average benchmark score of 0 in the database, with no individual test results recorded. Its percentile rank is listed as 50, which is higher than the RTX 3050 A Mobile's 44th percentile, but this rank is not supported by any actual measurement data. The absence of scores means the database cannot confirm any performance advantage for the RTX 3500, nor can it verify parity or inferiority relative to the RTX 3050 A Mobile.

Given the lack of head-to-head benchmark entries, the wins count is zero for both parts. The data indicates that the RTX 3050 A Mobile is a measured, quantifiable entity, whereas the RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation remains unmeasured in this database. Any conclusion about relative performance must rely on architectural and specification differences rather than direct test results.

The Verdict

From the data alone, the RTX 3050 A Mobile is the only one of the two with verified benchmark performance. Its 44th percentile ranking and average score of 8746 give it a concrete position among all GPUs. The RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation, despite its higher 50th percentile listing, has no recorded scores to substantiate that rank. The database treats the RTX 3500 as an unmeasured part, so no performance verdict can be drawn from benchmark results.

For a user strictly relying on recorded measurements, the RTX 3050 A Mobile is the part with demonstrated capability. Its scores across DirectX 11, DirectX 12, and compute workloads provide a baseline for expected behavior. The RTX 3500, by contrast, offers no such evidence in the database. The specification sheet suggests a more capable part, but the data does not confirm it.

The production status differs: the RTX 3050 A Mobile is end-of-life, while the RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation is active. This distinction matters for availability and long-term support, but it does not change the fact that no benchmark data exists for the newer part.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectures and foundries. The RTX 3050 A Mobile uses the GA106 chip built on Ampere architecture, fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. The RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation uses the AD104 chip built on Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC.

Transistor counts differ substantially. The GA106 contains 12,000 million transistors on a die size of 276 mm², yielding a transistor density of 43.5 million per mm². The AD104 contains 35,800 million transistors on a die size of 294 mm², yielding a transistor density of 121.8 million per mm². The Ada chip packs nearly three times the transistors into a slightly larger die, and its density is roughly 2.8 times higher.

Clock speeds also diverge. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has a base clock of 1065 MHz and a boost clock of 1343 MHz. The RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation has a base clock of 1725 MHz and a boost clock of 2250 MHz. The boost advantage for the Ada part is substantial, reflecting both the process node improvement and the architecture generation change.

Memory architecture differs as well. The RTX 3050 A Mobile uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, with memory speed of 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) and bandwidth of 192.0 GB/s. The RTX 3500 uses 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, with memory speed of 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) and bandwidth of 432.0 GB/s. The Ada part has three times the memory capacity and more than double the bandwidth.

Compute resources scale accordingly. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has 1792 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, 32 ROPs, 14 RT cores, and 56 tensor cores. The RTX 3500 has 5120 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, 64 ROPs, 40 RT cores, and 160 tensor cores. The Ada part more than doubles the shading units, nearly triples the TMUs, and more than doubles the RT and tensor core counts.

Pixel and texture rates reflect these differences. The RTX 3050 A Mobile delivers 42.98 GPixel/s and 75.21 GTexel/s. The RTX 3500 delivers 144.0 GPixel/s and 360.0 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 4.813 TFLOPS for the Ampere part versus 23.04 TFLOPS for the Ada part, a factor of roughly 4.8. FP16 performance scales identically at a 1:1 ratio for both.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile has an average benchmark score of 8746. The RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation has an average benchmark score of 0, meaning no measured performance data exists for it.

Q: How do the two compare in memory bandwidth?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile provides 192.0 GB/s over a 128-bit bus with 4 GB of GDDR6. The RTX 3500 provides 432.0 GB/s over a 192-bit bus with 12 GB of GDDR6, more than double the bandwidth and triple the capacity.

Q: What are the process nodes for each chip?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile uses an 8 nm process from Samsung. The RTX 3500 uses a 5 nm process from TSMC.

Q: Which part has more RT cores?

A: The RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation has 40 RT cores. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has 14 RT cores.

Q: What is the production status of each?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile is end-of-life. The RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation is active.

Q: Do both support the same DirectX version?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), along with OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on recorded data, the RTX 3050 A Mobile wins in the only category where measurements exist: benchmark scores. It has tangible results across Geekbench OpenCL and multiple Passmark tests. Its nearest rival comparison shows it performs within one percent of the GTX 460 v2 and Quadro P2200, and within 1.3 percent of the Radeon R9 M265X and Radeon Pro WX 5100. This places it in a competitive mid-range band.

The RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation wins in every specification category where numbers are listed. It has a higher base and boost clock, more shading units, more texture units, more ROPs, more RT and tensor cores, higher pixel and texture rates, higher FP32 and FP16 throughput, more memory, a wider bus, and higher bandwidth. Its transistor density is dramatically higher, and its process node is smaller. The data suggests it is the more capable part on paper.

However, the database does not confirm this with any benchmark result. The RTX 3500 has no recorded scores, so its specification advantages remain theoretical in terms of measured performance. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has the advantage of being a known quantity, with a 44th percentile rank and a verified average score.

For compute workloads, the RTX 3050 A Mobile shows a Passmark GPU compute score of 4419. The RTX 3500's compute capability is not measured. For DirectX 12, the RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 55, while the RTX 3500 has no score. The specification sheet for the RTX 3500 suggests it should outperform, but the data does not verify this.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ in nearly every recorded specification. The process node is 8 nm for the RTX 3050 A Mobile versus 5 nm for the RTX 3500. Foundry is Samsung versus TSMC. Transistor count is 12,000 million versus 35,800 million. Die size is 276 mm² versus 294 mm². Transistor density is 43.5 million per mm² versus 121.8 million per mm².

Base clock is 1065 MHz versus 1725 MHz. Boost clock is 1343 MHz versus 2250 MHz. Memory speed is 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) versus 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). Memory size is 4 GB versus 12 GB. Memory type is GDDR6 for both, but bus width is 128 bit versus 192 bit. Bandwidth is 192.0 GB/s versus 432.0 GB/s.

Shading units are 1792 versus 5120. TMUs are 56 versus 160. ROPs are 32 versus 64. RT cores are 14 versus 40. Tensor cores are 56 versus 160. Pixel rate is 42.98 GPixel/s versus 144.0 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 75.21 GTexel/s versus 360.0 GTexel/s. FP32 is 4.813 TFLOPS versus 23.04 TFLOPS. FP16 is 4.813 TFLOPS versus 23.04 TFLOPS, both at 1:1 ratio.

TDP is 45 W for the RTX 3050 A Mobile versus 100 W for the RTX 3500. The suggested PSU is listed only for the RTX 3500 at 300 W. Bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs are portable device dependent for the RTX 3050 A Mobile, while the RTX 3500 lists no outputs.

Release dates differ: the RTX 3050 A Mobile was released on 2023-12-31, while the RTX 3500 was released on 2023-03-20. The RTX 3050 A Mobile's predecessor is GeForce 20 Mobile, and its production status is end-of-life. The RTX 3500's predecessor is Ampere-MW, its successor is Blackwell-MW, and its production status is active. Neither part has a launch MSRP listed in the database.