
GeForce GTX 1050 3GB vs FirePro S9000

GeForce GTX 1050 3GB
Popular choices:

FirePro S9000
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. 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
Performance Per Dollar FirePro S9000
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB is significantly newer (2018 vs 2012). The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The FirePro S9000 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.1% higher G3D Mark score. However, the FirePro S9000 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | FirePro S9000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.1%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Pascal (2016−2021)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+33.3%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | Standard Size (267mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $60 versus $156 for the FirePro S9000, it costs 62% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 162.9% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | FirePro S9000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+162.9%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($60) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($156) |
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 GTX 1050 3GB and FirePro S9000

GeForce GTX 1050 3GB
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 21 2018. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1392 MHz to 1518 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,116 points.

FirePro S9000
The FirePro S9000 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in August 24 2012. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 900 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,059 points. Launch price was $2,499.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB scores 5,116 and the FirePro S9000 reaches 5,059 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB is built on Pascal while the FirePro S9000 uses GCN 1.0, both on 14 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 768 (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs 1,792 (FirePro S9000). Raw compute: 2.332 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs 3.226 TFLOPS (FirePro S9000).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | FirePro S9000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 5,116+1% | 5,059 |
| Architecture | Pascal | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 768 | 1792+133% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.332 TFLOPS | 3.226 TFLOPS+38% |
| ROPs | 24 | 32+33% |
| TMUs | 48 | 112+133% |
| L1 Cache | 288 KB | 448 KB+56% |
| L2 Cache | 768 KB | 768 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | FirePro S9000 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB comes with 3 GB of VRAM, while the FirePro S9000 has 4 GB. The FirePro S9000 offers 33.3% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 96-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | FirePro S9000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 3 GB | 4 GB+33% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 96-bit | 128-bit+33% |
| L2 Cache | 768 KB | 768 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs 12 (FirePro S9000). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 6.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | FirePro S9000 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 |
| Vulkan | 1.3+8% | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 6+100% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 6.0 (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs VCE 1.0 (FirePro S9000). Decoder: NVDEC 3.0 vs UVD 3.2. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2 (FirePro S9000).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | FirePro S9000 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 6.0 | VCE 1.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 3.0 | UVD 3.2 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265,VP9 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB draws 75W versus the FirePro S9000's 225W — a 100% difference. The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs 350W (FirePro S9000). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 145mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 65 vs 90°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | FirePro S9000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-67% | 225W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-14% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 145mm | 267mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 65-28% | 90°C |
| Perf/Watt | 68.2+203% | 22.5 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB launched at $129 MSRP and currently averages $60, while the FirePro S9000 launched at $2499 and now averages $156. The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB costs 61.5% less ($96 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 85.3 (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs 32.4 (FirePro S9000) — the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB offers 163.3% better value. The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB is the newer GPU (2018 vs 2012).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | FirePro S9000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $129-95% | $2499 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $60-62% | $156 |
| Performance per Dollar | 85.3+163% | 32.4 |
| Codename | GP107 | Tahiti |
| Release | May 21 2018 | August 24 2012 |
| Ranking | #440 | #441 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
















