NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile vs NVIDIA T400 Comparison

The Verdict

The data in the database clearly separates these two GPUs into distinct roles. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile is the decisive performance winner, taking both recorded head-to-head benchmarks with massive margins. The NVIDIA T400, by contrast, is a legacy, low-power professional card that trails far behind in every measurable compute task.

For users who need raw compute throughput, the RTX 4050 Mobile is the only choice. Its average benchmark score of 19,049 places it in the 63rd percentile of all GPUs, while the T400 sits at 16,508 and the 60th percentile. The two recorded direct comparisons show a 338.7% lead in Geekbench OpenCL and a 370.9% lead in Geekbench Vulkan. No interpretation can soften that gap: the RTX 4050 Mobile outperforms the T400 by roughly four to five times in these workloads.

The T400 is not without purpose, but that purpose is narrow. It is a single-slot, 30 W card with no RT or Tensor cores, designed for basic display output and light professional tasks. Its 2 GB memory and 80 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for 2D workloads or simple 3D acceleration, but not for modern gaming or compute-heavy applications. The RTX 4050 Mobile, with 6 GB GDDR6 and 192 GB/s bandwidth, is in a different class entirely. It also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the T400 only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1), meaning the newer card handles current graphics features like ray tracing and mesh shaders at the API level.

The verdict: the RTX 4050 Mobile is for anyone who needs real GPU compute, whether for gaming, content creation, or general-purpose acceleration. The T400 is for legacy systems requiring a low-profile, low-power card with multiple mini-DisplayPort outputs, where performance is secondary to compatibility and power draw. The production status confirms this: the RTX 4050 Mobile is active, while the T400 is end-of-life.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the recorded benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile wins both head-to-head tests. It scores 74,748 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 17,039 for the T400, a 338.7% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 75,235 versus 15,976, a 370.9% advantage.

Q: Does the T400 support ray tracing?

A: No. The T400 has no RT cores and no Tensor cores listed in the database. Its DirectX support is 12 (12_1), which lacks the full ray tracing and mesh shader features of DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) found on the RTX 4050 Mobile.

Q: What is the memory difference between the two?

A: The RTX 4050 Mobile has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus, delivering 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The T400 has 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 80.00 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4050 Mobile also runs its memory at 16 Gbps effective versus 10 Gbps effective for the T400.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The RTX 4050 Mobile, built on TSMC's 5 nm process, packs 18,900 million transistors into a 159 mm² die, for a density of 118.9M per mm². The T400, on TSMC's 12 nm process, has 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, for a density of 23.5M per mm².

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No. The RTX 4050 Mobile is listed as Active. The T400 is listed as End-of-life, with a release date of May 2021 and a successor in the Workstation Ampere line.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The RTX 4050 Mobile has a TDP of 50 W, while the T400 is rated at 30 W. The T400 is also a single-slot card, whereas the RTX 4050 Mobile is an IGP (integrated graphics package) for laptops.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and manufacturing processes. The RTX 4050 Mobile uses the AD107 chip based on Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm TSMC process. The T400 uses the TU117 chip based on Turing architecture, fabricated on a 12 nm TSMC process.

The transistor counts reflect the generational leap. The AD107 contains 18,900 million transistors on a 159 mm² die, achieving a density of 118.9M per mm². The TU117 contains 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, with a density of 23.5M per mm². The RTX 4050 Mobile is denser by a factor of five, which explains its higher performance despite a smaller physical die.

Feature support differs significantly. The RTX 4050 Mobile includes 20 RT cores and 80 Tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads. The T400 has neither, with null entries for both in the database. This makes the T400 unsuitable for modern ray-traced games or machine learning inference tasks that rely on Tensor cores.

The API support confirms the architectural gap. The RTX 4050 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), the latest feature level, while the T400 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, so older graphics APIs see parity. The RTX 4050 Mobile also uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the T400 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The newer PCIe generation provides higher per-lane bandwidth, though the x8 width means the total lanes are halved.

Specification Differences

The table below shows only the fields where the two GPUs differ, based on the database records.

| Specification | RTX 4050 Mobile | T400 |

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

| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | Turing |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 12 nm |

| Transistors | 18,900 million | 4,700 million |

| Die Size | 159 mm² | 200 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 118.9M / mm² | 23.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1455 MHz | 420 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1755 MHz | 1425 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 16 Gbps effective | 10 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 96 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 192.0 GB/s | 80.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2560 | 384 |

| TMUs | 80 | 24 |

| ROPs | 48 | 16 |

| RT Cores | 20 | None |

| Tensor Cores | 80 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 84.24 GPixel/s | 22.80 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 140.4 GTexel/s | 34.20 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 8.986 TFLOPS | 1,094.4 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 8.986 TFLOPS (1:1) | 2.189 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 50 W | 30 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Single-slot |

| Suggested PSU | None | 200 W |

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

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 3x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

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

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | January 2023 | May 2021 |

The FP16 ratio also differs: the RTX 4050 Mobile runs FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, while the T400 runs FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, meaning the T400's FP16 throughput is double its FP32 throughput.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct comparisons, both of which the RTX 4050 Mobile wins by overwhelming margins.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 4050 Mobile scores 74,748 against the T400's 17,039. This is a 338.7% advantage. The OpenCL workload is compute-heavy, and the RTX 4050 Mobile's 2,560 shading units and 8.986 TFLOPS FP32 throughput simply overwhelm the T400's 384 shading units and 1,094.4 GFLOPS. The T400's FP32 output is only about 12% of the RTX 4050 Mobile's, and the benchmark results reflect that raw compute gap.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 4050 Mobile scores 75,235 against the T400's 15,976. This is a 370.9% advantage, even larger than the OpenCL gap. Vulkan benefits from the newer architecture's scheduling and the higher memory bandwidth (192.0 GB/s versus 80.00 GB/s). The RTX 4050 Mobile's pixel rate of 84.24 GPixel/s versus 22.80 GPixel/s for the T400 also contributes to its dominance in graphics-related Vulkan workloads.

The nearest rival comparisons place these scores in context. The RTX 4050 Mobile's average score of 19,049 is within 0.1% of the AMD Radeon RX 6600 (19,036) and 0.5% of the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation (18,954). It is essentially tied with the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 (19,030) and slightly ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla K20m (19,089) by 0.2%. The T400's average score of 16,508 is within 0% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 (16,504), 0.6% of the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 (16,415), and 0.9% of the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT (16,361). These rival deltas show that the RTX 4050 Mobile sits in a mid-range desktop GPU class, while the T400 sits in an older, lower-performance tier.

The wins tally is 2 to 0 in favor of the RTX 4050 Mobile. There are no recorded tests where the T400 comes out ahead.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4050 Mobile wins in every recorded category, but the magnitude of its wins points to specific use cases.

For compute-heavy workloads such as OpenCL general-purpose GPU programming, the RTX 4050 Mobile is the clear choice. Its 338.7% lead in OpenCL means tasks like physics simulation, image processing, or data-parallel computing will finish in a fraction of the time. The 8.986 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 80 Tensor cores also make it suitable for AI inference, which the T400 cannot accelerate at all due to its lack of Tensor cores.

For graphics-heavy workloads measured by Vulkan, the RTX 4050 Mobile's 370.9% lead is even more pronounced. The higher pixel rate (84.24 GPixel/s) and texture rate (140.4 GTexel/s) allow it to handle modern game engines at higher resolutions and detail settings. The 6 GB memory buffer also provides room for larger textures and more complex scenes than the T400's 2 GB can accommodate. Gamers and 3D artists working with current software should pick the RTX 4050 Mobile without hesitation.

The T400's wins are not in performance but in form factor and legacy compatibility. It is a single-slot card with a 30 W TDP, meaning it can fit into small workstations and systems with minimal power delivery. Its 3x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs support multi-monitor setups, while the RTX 4050 Mobile's display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," reflecting its laptop-oriented IGP design. The T400 also uses a full PCIe 3.0 x16 slot, which may be the only option in older motherboards.

For users running legacy professional software that predates DirectX 12 Ultimate, the T400's DirectX 12 (12_1) support is sufficient. Its 2.189 TFLOPS FP16 throughput (2:1 ratio) can handle some compute tasks, but the low FP32 rate of 1,094.4 GFLOPS limits its usefulness. The T400 is best suited for basic CAD viewing, spreadsheet work with multiple monitors, or as a display adapter in systems where the CPU does the heavy lifting.

In summary, the RTX 4050 Mobile is the performance leader by a factor of four to five in the recorded benchmarks. The T400 is a legacy, low-power option for specific workstation scenarios, not a competitor in compute or modern graphics workloads. The database records no test where the T400 wins, and its end-of-life status suggests it is not a future-proof investment.