
GeForce GTX 1050 3GB vs Radeon R9 M295X

GeForce GTX 1050 3GB
Popular choices:

Radeon R9 M295X
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 Radeon R9 M295X
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB uses modern memory architecture. 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 Radeon R9 M295X lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R9 M295X is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.7% higher G3D Mark score and 33.3% more VRAM (4 GB vs 3 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | Radeon R9 M295X |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.7%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Pascal (2016−2021)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)) |
| 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 | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $60 versus $150 for the Radeon R9 M295X, it costs 60% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 148.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | Radeon R9 M295X |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+148.3%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($60) | ⚠️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 GTX 1050 3GB and Radeon R9 M295X

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.

Radeon R9 M295X
The Radeon R9 M295X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 23 2014. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 723 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,150 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB scores 5,116 and the Radeon R9 M295X reaches 5,150 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB is built on Pascal while the Radeon R9 M295X uses GCN 3.0, both on 14 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 768 (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs 2,048 (Radeon R9 M295X). Raw compute: 2.332 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs 2.961 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 M295X).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | Radeon R9 M295X |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 5,116 | 5,150 |
| Architecture | Pascal | GCN 3.0 |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 768 | 2048+167% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.332 TFLOPS | 2.961 TFLOPS+27% |
| ROPs | 24 | 32+33% |
| TMUs | 48 | 128+167% |
| L1 Cache | 288 KB | 512 KB+78% |
| L2 Cache | 768 KB+50% | 512 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | Radeon R9 M295X |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB comes with 3 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 M295X has 4 GB. The Radeon R9 M295X offers 33.3% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 84 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs 176 GB/s (Radeon R9 M295X) — a 109.5% advantage for the Radeon R9 M295X. Bus width: 96-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 768 KB (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs 512 KB (Radeon R9 M295X) — the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | Radeon R9 M295X |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 3 GB | 4 GB+33% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 84 GB/s | 176 GB/s+110% |
| Bus Width | 96-bit | 256-bit+167% |
| L2 Cache | 768 KB+50% | 512 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs 12 (Radeon R9 M295X). Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 0.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | Radeon R9 M295X |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 0 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 6.0 (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs VCE 3.0 (Radeon R9 M295X). Decoder: NVDEC 3.0 vs UVD 4.2.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | Radeon R9 M295X |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 6.0 | VCE 3.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 3.0 | UVD 4.2 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265,VP9 | — |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB draws 75W versus the Radeon R9 M295X's 250W — a 107.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs 350W (Radeon R9 M295X). Power connectors: None vs Mobile. Card length: 145mm vs 1mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | Radeon R9 M295X |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-70% | 250W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-14% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | Mobile |
| Length | 145mm | 1mm |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 65 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 68.2+231% | 20.6 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB launched at $129 MSRP and currently averages $60, while the Radeon R9 M295X launched at $300 and now averages $150. The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB costs 60% less ($90 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 85.3 (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs 34.3 (Radeon R9 M295X) — the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB offers 148.7% better value. The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB is the newer GPU (2018 vs 2014).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | Radeon R9 M295X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $129-57% | $300 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $60-60% | $150 |
| Performance per Dollar | 85.3+149% | 34.3 |
| Codename | GP107 | Amethyst |
| Release | May 21 2018 | November 23 2014 |
| Ranking | #440 | #437 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
















