GeForce RTX 2050 vs FirePro W9100
GeForce RTX 2050
Popular choices:
FirePro W9100
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 GeForce RTX 2050
Performance Per Dollar FirePro W9100
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce RTX 2050 uses modern memory architecture. The GeForce RTX 2050 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The FirePro W9100 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FirePro W9100 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.4% higher G3D Mark score and 300% more VRAM (16 GB vs 4 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce RTX 2050.
| Insight | GeForce RTX 2050 | FirePro W9100 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.4%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Turing (2018−2022)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | ✨ DLSS 3/4 + Frame Gen Support | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+300%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | Standard Size (275mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce RTX 2050 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $150 versus $200 for the FirePro W9100, it costs 25% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 32.7% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce RTX 2050 | FirePro W9100 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+32.7%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($150) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($200) |
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 RTX 2050 and FirePro W9100
GeForce RTX 2050
The GeForce RTX 2050 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in September 20 2018. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1515 MHz to 1710 MHz. It has 2944 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 215W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. It features 46 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,714 points. Launch price was $699.
FirePro W9100
The FirePro W9100 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 26 2014. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 930 MHz. It has 2816 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 275W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,748 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce RTX 2050 scores 7,714 and the FirePro W9100 reaches 7,748 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce RTX 2050 is built on Turing while the FirePro W9100 uses GCN 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 2,944 (GeForce RTX 2050) vs 2,816 (FirePro W9100). Raw compute: 10.07 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 2050) vs 5.238 TFLOPS (FirePro W9100).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 2050 | FirePro W9100 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,714 | 7,748 |
| Architecture | Turing | GCN 2.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2944+5% | 2816 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 10.07 TFLOPS+92% | 5.238 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64 | 64 |
| TMUs | 184+5% | 176 |
| L1 Cache | 2.9 MB+320% | 0.69 MB |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+300% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
The GeForce RTX 2050 gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The FirePro W9100 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 2050 | FirePro W9100 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | DLSS 2.0 | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 / AFMF (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce RTX 2050 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the FirePro W9100 has 16 GB. The FirePro W9100 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 4 MB (GeForce RTX 2050) vs 1 MB (FirePro W9100) — the GeForce RTX 2050 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 2050 | FirePro W9100 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 16 GB+300% |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 256-bit+300% |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+300% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.2 (GeForce RTX 2050) vs 12 (FirePro W9100). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 6.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 2050 | FirePro W9100 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.2+2% | 12 |
| Vulkan | 1.3+8% | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 6+50% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 8.0 (GeForce RTX 2050) vs VCE 2.0 (FirePro W9100). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP11 vs UVD 4.2. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) (GeForce RTX 2050) vs H.264 (FirePro W9100).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 2050 | FirePro W9100 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 8.0 | VCE 2.0 |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP11 | UVD 4.2 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) | H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce RTX 2050 draws 215W versus the FirePro W9100's 275W — a 24.5% difference. The GeForce RTX 2050 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce RTX 2050) vs 350W (FirePro W9100). Power connectors: 6-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 275mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 2050 | FirePro W9100 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 215W-22% | 275W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-14% | 350W |
| Power Connector | 6-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | 275mm |
| Height | 0mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 93 |
| Perf/Watt | 35.9+27% | 28.2 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce RTX 2050 launched at $150 MSRP and currently averages $150, while the FirePro W9100 launched at $4000 and now averages $200. The GeForce RTX 2050 costs 25% less ($50 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 51.4 (GeForce RTX 2050) vs 38.7 (FirePro W9100) — the GeForce RTX 2050 offers 32.8% better value. The GeForce RTX 2050 is the newer GPU (2018 vs 2014).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 2050 | FirePro W9100 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $150-96% | $4000 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $150-25% | $200 |
| Performance per Dollar | 51.4+33% | 38.7 |
| Codename | TU104 | Hawaii |
| Release | September 20 2018 | March 26 2014 |
| Ranking | #94 | #328 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce RTX 2050 and FirePro W9100
