NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile vs NVIDIA TITAN V Comparison

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA TITAN V is in a completely different performance class than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile. Across every shared benchmark, the TITAN V delivers more than triple the score of the mobile chip. However, the RTX 3050 Mobile is a modern, power-efficient part for laptops, while the TITAN V is a dual-slot desktop behemoth from a previous generation. This comparison is not a contest of equals; it is a demonstration of how far mobile hardware has come in efficiency, even while desktop flagship performance remains king.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The TITAN V wins all three head-to-head comparisons by overwhelming margins. In the 3dmark_3dmark_steel_nomad_dx12 test, the TITAN V scores 3565 points against the RTX 3050 Mobile’s 421 points. This translates to a 746.8% advantage for the desktop card, indicating that the TITAN V is over eight times faster in this modern DirectX 12 workload.

The lead narrows somewhat in compute-oriented tests, but remains decisive. In geekbench_opencl, the TITAN V scores 157265, while the RTX 3050 Mobile scores 50038, giving the TITAN V a 214.3% lead. Similarly, in geekbench_vulkan, the TITAN V’s score of 152117 dwarfs the mobile part’s 49051, a margin of 210.1%. These results are consistent with the underlying hardware: the TITAN V’s raw compute throughput is more than double that of the RTX 3050 Mobile.

The average benchmark score reinforces this hierarchy. The TITAN V’s average score is 34355, placing it in the 79th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA RTX A1000 (avg score 34207, 0.4% slower), the AMD Radeon HD 7970 (avg score 34541, 0.5% faster), and the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB (avg score 34154, 0.6% slower). The RTX 3050 Mobile, with an average score of 33170, sits in the 78th percentile, slightly behind the TITAN V in relative standing. Its closest competitors are the NVIDIA T550 Mobile (avg score 33161, 0% delta), the AMD Radeon Pro 570 (avg score 33207, 0.1% faster), and the NVIDIA T600 Mobile (avg score 32849, 1% slower). While the percentile ranking is similar, the absolute performance gap is vast.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent different eras and design philosophies. The TITAN V uses the GV100 chip based on the Volta architecture, fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It integrates 21,100 million transistors on a massive 815 mm² die. In contrast, the RTX 3050 Mobile uses the GA107 chip based on Ampere, built on an 8 nm process at Samsung. This smaller chip contains 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, yielding a much higher transistor density of 43.5M / mm² versus the TITAN V’s 25.9M / mm².

The memory subsystems are fundamentally different. The TITAN V uses 12 GB of HBM2 memory on a 3072-bit bus, providing a massive 651.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 3050 Mobile is equipped with 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 192.0 GB/s. The TITAN V’s bandwidth advantage is a direct result of its server-grade HBM2 implementation.

Core counts also favor the TITAN V. It boasts 5120 shading units, 320 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 96 raster operation units (ROPs). The RTX 3050 Mobile has 2048 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The TITAN V also includes 640 tensor cores, but notably lacks dedicated ray tracing cores. The RTX 3050 Mobile includes 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores. This makes the mobile part feature-rich for its class, while the TITAN V relies on brute-force compute. The TITAN V’s FP32 performance is 14.90 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 29.80 TFLOPS (2:1). The RTX 3050 Mobile delivers 5.501 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 (1:1 ratio).

Where Each One Wins

The TITAN V is the clear winner for any desktop workload that demands maximum compute power. Its 746.8% lead in DirectX 12 gaming benchmarks suggests it can handle high-resolution, high-detail gaming that would be impossible on the mobile chip. The 214.3% and 210.1% leads in OpenCL and Vulkan compute tests respectively make it suitable for professional 3D rendering, scientific simulations, and machine learning training, where the massive HBM2 bandwidth and tensor cores are assets. The TITAN V’s 651.3 GB/s bandwidth alone is a decisive factor for memory-intensive tasks.

The RTX 3050 Mobile wins in the domain of portability and efficiency. With a TDP of just 45 W versus the TITAN V’s 250 W, it is designed for laptops where power draw and heat dissipation are critical. It features a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the TITAN V uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The mobile chip also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), a newer feature set than the TITAN V’s DirectX 12 (12_1). The presence of 16 RT cores gives it hardware-accelerated ray tracing capabilities that the TITAN V entirely lacks. For a laptop user playing esports titles or moderate AAA games at lower settings, the RTX 3050 Mobile is the only viable option of the two, as the TITAN V is not a mobile part.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the 3dmark_3dmark_steel_nomad_dx12 benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA TITAN V is significantly faster, scoring 3565 points compared to the GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile’s 421 points, representing a 746.8% higher score.

Q: Does the GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile support hardware ray tracing?

A: Yes, it includes 16 dedicated ray tracing cores, a feature that the NVIDIA TITAN V does not have.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between these two GPUs?

A: The TITAN V has a bandwidth of 651.3 GB/s using HBM2 memory on a 3072-bit bus. The RTX 3050 Mobile has 192.0 GB/s using GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus.

Q: How does the power consumption compare between the two cards?

A: The TITAN V has a TDP of 250 W, whereas the GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile has a TDP of just 45 W.

Q: In the geekbench_vulkan test, what is the performance margin?

A: The TITAN V scores 152117, and the RTX 3050 Mobile scores 49051. This gives the TITAN V a 210.1% advantage.

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score and percentile ranking?

A: The TITAN V has a higher average score of 34355 and sits in the 79th percentile. The RTX 3050 Mobile has an average score of 33170 and sits in the 78th percentile.

The Verdict

The choice between these two GPUs is dictated by form factor and workload, not performance equivalence. The data shows the NVIDIA TITAN V is the superior performer in every measured category. Its 746.8% lead in the DirectX 12 test and 214.3% lead in OpenCL make it the only choice for desktop users requiring maximum rendering power or compute throughput. It is the definitive pick for high-end desktop gaming and professional workstations where its 250 W TDP and dual-slot size are acceptable trade-offs for its 14.90 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 651.3 GB/s of memory bandwidth.

Conversely, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile is the appropriate choice for users who need a capable GPU in a laptop. Its 45 W TDP makes it feasible for thin-and-light machines. Its 5.501 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 192.0 GB/s bandwidth are substantial for its class, and the inclusion of 16 RT cores provides modern features like hardware ray tracing. While its average benchmark score of 33170 is only 3.5% lower than the TITAN V’s, this metric is misleading; in actual application tests, the TITAN V is over three times faster. The RTX 3050 Mobile is the right choice for a portable system; the TITAN V is the right choice for a stationary powerhouse.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA TITAN V | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Chip | GV100 | GA107 |

| Architecture | Volta | Ampere |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 8 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Samsung |

| Transistors | 21,100 million | 8,700 million |

| Die Size | 815 mm² | 200 mm² |

| Base Clock | 1200 MHz | 1065 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1455 MHz | 1343 MHz |

| Memory Size | 12 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM2 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | 3072 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 651.3 GB/s | 192.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 5120 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 320 | 64 |

| ROPs | 96 | 32 |

| RT Cores | None | 16 |

| Tensor Cores | 640 | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 139.7 GPixel/s | 42.98 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 465.6 GTexel/s | 85.95 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 14.90 TFLOPS | 5.501 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 29.80 TFLOPS (2:1) | 5.501 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 250 W | 45 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| DirectX Version | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |