
GeForce RTX 3050 6GB
Popular choices:

GRID K240Q
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.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.
GeForce RTX 3050 6GB
2024Why buy it
- ✅+323% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Costs $331 less on MSRP ($169 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 1151.5% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 63.6 vs 5.1 G3D/$ ($169 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
- ✅Access to DLSS 2 Super Resolution (2020).
- ✅200% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 2 GB).
Trade-offs
- ❌15900% longer card at 160mm vs 1mm.
GRID K240Q
2013Why buy it
- ✅Measures 1mm instead of 160mm, a 159mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (2,541 vs 10,749).
- ❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌No DLSS support; it relies on Upscaling support instead.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2013-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌195.9% HIGHER MSRP$500 MSRPvs$169 MSRP
GeForce RTX 3050 6GB
2024GRID K240Q
2013Why buy it
- ✅+323% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Costs $331 less on MSRP ($169 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 1151.5% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 63.6 vs 5.1 G3D/$ ($169 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
- ✅Access to DLSS 2 Super Resolution (2020).
- ✅200% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 2 GB).
Why buy it
- ✅Measures 1mm instead of 160mm, a 159mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌15900% longer card at 160mm vs 1mm.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (2,541 vs 10,749).
- ❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌No DLSS support; it relies on Upscaling support instead.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2013-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌195.9% HIGHER MSRP$500 MSRPvs$169 MSRP
Quick Answers
So, is GeForce RTX 3050 6GB better than GRID K240Q?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
Is GRID K240Q still worth buying for gaming in 2026?
Games Benchmarks
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 9800X3D 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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | GRID K240Q |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 85 FPS | 102 FPS |
| medium | 72 FPS | 83 FPS |
| high | 60 FPS | 65 FPS |
| ultra | 40 FPS | 38 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 74 FPS | 85 FPS |
| medium | 64 FPS | 69 FPS |
| high | 47 FPS | 50 FPS |
| ultra | 30 FPS | 28 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 27 FPS | 28 FPS |
| medium | 25 FPS | 26 FPS |
| high | 17 FPS | 17 FPS |
| ultra | 15 FPS | 15 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | GRID K240Q |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 174 FPS | 88 FPS |
| medium | 149 FPS | 62 FPS |
| high | 118 FPS | 48 FPS |
| ultra | 87 FPS | 32 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 129 FPS | 48 FPS |
| medium | 106 FPS | 31 FPS |
| high | 83 FPS | 23 FPS |
| ultra | 62 FPS | 17 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 74 FPS | 18 FPS |
| medium | 62 FPS | 12 FPS |
| high | 48 FPS | 9 FPS |
| ultra | 34 FPS | 7 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | GRID K240Q |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 484 FPS | 114 FPS |
| medium | 387 FPS | 91 FPS |
| high | 322 FPS | 76 FPS |
| ultra | 242 FPS | 57 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 363 FPS | 86 FPS |
| medium | 290 FPS | 69 FPS |
| high | 242 FPS | 57 FPS |
| ultra | 181 FPS | 43 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 242 FPS | 57 FPS |
| medium | 193 FPS | 46 FPS |
| high | 161 FPS | 38 FPS |
| ultra | 121 FPS | 29 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | GRID K240Q |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 243 FPS | 114 FPS |
| medium | 210 FPS | 91 FPS |
| high | 171 FPS | 76 FPS |
| ultra | 144 FPS | 57 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 185 FPS | 86 FPS |
| medium | 166 FPS | 69 FPS |
| high | 131 FPS | 57 FPS |
| ultra | 109 FPS | 43 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 104 FPS | 57 FPS |
| medium | 87 FPS | 46 FPS |
| high | 69 FPS | 38 FPS |
| ultra | 55 FPS | 29 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce RTX 3050 6GB and GRID K240Q

GeForce RTX 3050 6GB
GeForce RTX 3050 6GB
The GeForce RTX 3050 6GB is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 2 2024. It features the Ampere architecture. The core clock ranges from 1042 MHz to 1470 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 70W. Manufactured using 8 nm process technology. It features 18 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 10,749 points. Launch price was $179.

GRID K240Q
GRID K240Q
The GRID K240Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 28 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 745 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,541 points. Launch price was $469.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce RTX 3050 6GB scores 10,749 versus the GRID K240Q's 2,541 — the GeForce RTX 3050 6GB leads by 323%. The GeForce RTX 3050 6GB is built on Ampere while the GRID K240Q uses Kepler, both on 8 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 2,304 (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs 1,536 (GRID K240Q). Raw compute: 6.774 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs 2.289 TFLOPS (GRID K240Q).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | GRID K240Q |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 10,749+323% | 2,541 |
| Architecture | Ampere | Kepler |
| Process Node | 8 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2304+50% | 1536 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 6.774 TFLOPS+196% | 2.289 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 72 | 128+78% |
| L1 Cache | 2.3 MB+1669% | 0.13 MB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+300% | 0.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
The GeForce RTX 3050 6GB gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The GRID K240Q relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | GRID K240Q |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | DLSS 2 Super Resolution | Upscaling support |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce RTX 3050 6GB comes with 6 GB of VRAM, while the GRID K240Q has 2 GB. The GeForce RTX 3050 6GB offers 200% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 96-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs 0.5 MB (GRID K240Q) — the GeForce RTX 3050 6GB has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | GRID K240Q |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 6 GB+200% | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 96-bit+50% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+300% | 0.5 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs 11_0 (GRID K240Q). OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 0.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | GRID K240Q |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate+9% | 11_0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 0 |
Media & Encoding
Supported codecs: H.264,HEVC,AV1 (Decode Only) (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GRID K240Q).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | GRID K240Q |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC (5th Gen) | — |
| Decoder | NVDEC (7th Gen) | — |
| Codecs | H.264,HEVC,AV1 (Decode Only) | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce RTX 3050 6GB draws 70W versus the GRID K240Q's 225W — a 105.1% difference. The GeForce RTX 3050 6GB is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs 350W (GRID K240Q). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 160mm vs 1mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | GRID K240Q |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 70W-69% | 225W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-14% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 160mm | 1mm |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C-6% | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 153.6+1259% | 11.3 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce RTX 3050 6GB launched at $169 MSRP, while the GRID K240Q launched at $500. The GeForce RTX 3050 6GB costs 66.2% less ($331 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 63.6 (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs 5.1 (GRID K240Q) — the GeForce RTX 3050 6GB offers 1147.1% better value. The GeForce RTX 3050 6GB is the newer GPU (2024 vs 2013).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | GRID K240Q |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $169-66% | $500 |
| Performance per Dollar | 63.6+1147% | 5.1 |
| Codename | GA107 | GK104 |
| Release | February 2 2024 | June 28 2013 |
| Ranking | #252 | #628 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












