GeForce GT 140 vs GeForce RTX 3050 OEM
GeForce GT 140
Popular choices:
GeForce RTX 3050 OEM
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. The GeForce GT 140 is positioned at rank #188 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GT 140
Performance Per Dollar GeForce RTX 3050 OEM
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce RTX 3050 OEM is significantly newer (2022 vs 2014). The GeForce RTX 3050 OEM likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GT 140 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce RTX 3050 OEM is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1707.3% higher G3D Mark score and 700% more VRAM (8 GB vs 1 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GT 140.
| Insight | GeForce GT 140 | GeForce RTX 3050 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1707.3%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1707.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🏆Elite Architecture (Ampere (2020−2025) / 8nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | ✨ DLSS 3/4 + Frame Gen Support |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | 🎮 High Capacity (8 GB) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce RTX 3050 OEM offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $150 (vs $15), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 80.7% better value per dollar than the GeForce GT 140.
| Insight | GeForce GT 140 | GeForce RTX 3050 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+80.7%) |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($15) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($150) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GT 140 and GeForce RTX 3050 OEM
GeForce GT 140
The GeForce GT 140 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 29 2014. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 993 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 64W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 658 points. Launch price was $89.
GeForce RTX 3050 OEM
The GeForce RTX 3050 OEM is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 4 2022. It features the Ampere architecture. The core clock ranges from 1515 MHz to 1755 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 130W. Manufactured using 8 nm process technology. It features 20 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 11,892 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GT 140 scores 658 versus the GeForce RTX 3050 OEM's 11,892 — the GeForce RTX 3050 OEM leads by 1707.3%. The GeForce GT 140 is built on Kepler while the GeForce RTX 3050 OEM uses Ampere, both on 28 nm vs 8 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce GT 140) vs 2,560 (GeForce RTX 3050 OEM). Raw compute: 0.7626 TFLOPS (GeForce GT 140) vs 8.986 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 3050 OEM).
| Feature | GeForce GT 140 | GeForce RTX 3050 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 658 | 11,892+1707% |
| Architecture | Kepler | Ampere |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 8 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 2560+567% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.7626 TFLOPS | 8.986 TFLOPS+1078% |
| ROPs | 16 | 32+100% |
| TMUs | 32 | 80+150% |
| L1 Cache | 0.03 MB | 2.5 MB+8233% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GT 140 | GeForce RTX 3050 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | DLSS 2.0 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 / AFMF (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GT 140 comes with 1 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce RTX 3050 OEM has 8 GB. The GeForce RTX 3050 OEM offers 700% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (GeForce GT 140) vs 2 MB (GeForce RTX 3050 OEM) — the GeForce RTX 3050 OEM has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GT 140 | GeForce RTX 3050 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB | 8 GB+700% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | 224 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.0 (GeForce GT 140) vs 12.2 (GeForce RTX 3050 OEM). Vulkan: None vs 1.3. OpenGL: 3.3 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GT 140 | GeForce RTX 3050 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.0 | 12.2+22% |
| Vulkan | None | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6+39% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 4+100% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: No (GeForce GT 140) vs 8th Gen NVENC (GeForce RTX 3050 OEM). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP3 vs 5th Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 (GeForce GT 140) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) (GeForce RTX 3050 OEM).
| Feature | GeForce GT 140 | GeForce RTX 3050 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | No | 8th Gen NVENC |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP3 | 5th Gen NVDEC |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GT 140 draws 64W versus the GeForce RTX 3050 OEM's 130W — a 68% difference. The GeForce GT 140 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GT 140) vs 450W (GeForce RTX 3050 OEM). Power connectors: None vs 8-pin. Card length: 229mm vs 235mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | GeForce GT 140 | GeForce RTX 3050 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 64W-51% | 130W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-22% | 450W |
| Power Connector | None | 8-pin |
| Length | 229mm | 235mm |
| Height | 111mm | 124mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | 75°C-12% |
| Perf/Watt | 10.3 | 91.5+788% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GT 140 launched at $99 MSRP and currently averages $15, while the GeForce RTX 3050 OEM launched at $249 and now averages $150. The GeForce GT 140 costs 90% less ($135 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 43.9 (GeForce GT 140) vs 79.3 (GeForce RTX 3050 OEM) — the GeForce RTX 3050 OEM offers 80.6% better value. The GeForce RTX 3050 OEM is the newer GPU (2022 vs 2014).
| Feature | GeForce GT 140 | GeForce RTX 3050 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $99-60% | $249 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15-90% | $150 |
| Performance per Dollar | 43.9 | 79.3+81% |
| Codename | GK107 | GA106 |
| Release | May 29 2014 | January 4 2022 |
| Ranking | #777 | #224 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce GT 140 and GeForce RTX 3050 OEM
