GeForce RTX 3050 6GB
RADEON 9200 SE
GeForce RTX 3050 6GB vs RADEON 9200 SE Performance Spectrum
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.
GeForce RTX 3050 6GB vs RADEON 9200 SE FPS Benchmarks
Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.
Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Among Us
Apex Legends
ARC Raiders
Baldur's Gate 3
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
GeForce RTX 3050 6GB vs RADEON 9200 SE: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.
GeForce RTX 3050 6GB
2024Why buy it
- ✅8724.0% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Delivers 63503.6% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 63.6 vs 0.1 G3D/$ ($169 MSRP vs $30 MSRP).
- ✅Access to DLSS 2 Super Resolution (2020).
- ✅2300% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 256 MB).
- ✅Better long-term bet: Ampere (2020−2025) on 8nm gives it a newer hardware base for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌27.3% higher power demand at 70W vs 55W.
RADEON 9200 SE
2025Why buy it
- ✅Costs $139 less on MSRP ($30 MSRP vs $169 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 55W instead of 70W, a 15W reduction.
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce RTX 3050 6GB across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 256 MB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌No DLSS support; it relies on FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 (2025) instead.
- ❌GeForce RTX 3050 6GB is the safer long-term pick here because the hardware is newer and the feature stack is stronger.
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0.1 vs 63.6 G3D/$ ($30 MSRP vs $169 MSRP).
Quick Answers
Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?
Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?
Which GPU is the better buy today?
GeForce RTX 3050 6GB vs RADEON 9200 SE Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.
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.
RADEON 9200 SE
The RADEON 9200 SE is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 6 2025. It features the RDNA 3.5 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1295 MHz to 2900 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 55W. Manufactured using 4 nm process technology. It features 40 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce RTX 3050 6GB scores 10,749 versus the RADEON 9200 SE's 3 — the GeForce RTX 3050 6GB leads by 358200%. The GeForce RTX 3050 6GB is built on Ampere while the RADEON 9200 SE uses RDNA 3.5, both on 8 nm vs 4 nm. Shader units: 2,304 (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs 2,560 (RADEON 9200 SE). Raw compute: 6.774 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs 14.85 TFLOPS (RADEON 9200 SE). Boost clocks: 1470 MHz vs 2900 MHz. Ray tracing: 18 RT cores (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs 40 (RADEON 9200 SE) with 72 Tensor cores.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | RADEON 9200 SE |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 10,749+358200% | 3 |
| Architecture | Ampere | RDNA 3.5 |
| Process Node | 8 nm | 4 nm |
| Shading Units | 2304 | 2560+11% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 6.774 TFLOPS | 14.85 TFLOPS+119% |
| Boost Clock | 1470 MHz | 2900 MHz+97% |
| ROPs | 32 | 64+100% |
| TMUs | 72 | 160+122% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 8 MB+300% |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 18 | 40+122% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
The GeForce RTX 3050 6GB gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The RADEON 9200 SE leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | RADEON 9200 SE |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | DLSS 2 Super Resolution | FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce RTX 3050 6GB has 6 GB of VRAM, while the RADEON 9200 SE carries 256 MB. GeForce RTX 3050 6GB gives you 2300% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 96-bit on the GeForce RTX 3050 6GB and 64-bit on the RADEON 9200 SE. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs 8 MB (RADEON 9200 SE) — the RADEON 9200 SE has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | RADEON 9200 SE |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 6 GB+2300% | 0.25 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 96-bit+50% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 8 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs 8.1 (RADEON 9200 SE). Vulkan: 1.3 vs N/A. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 1.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | RADEON 9200 SE |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate+48% | 8.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | N/A |
| OpenGL | 4.6+254% | 1.3 |
| Max Displays | 4+100% | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC (5th Gen) (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs None (RADEON 9200 SE). Decoder: NVDEC (7th Gen) vs None. Supported codecs: H.264,HEVC,AV1 (Decode Only) (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs MPEG-2 (RADEON 9200 SE).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | RADEON 9200 SE |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC (5th Gen) | None |
| Decoder | NVDEC (7th Gen) | None |
| Codecs | H.264,HEVC,AV1 (Decode Only) | MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce RTX 3050 6GB draws 70W versus the RADEON 9200 SE's 55W — a 24% difference. The RADEON 9200 SE is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs 350W (RADEON 9200 SE). Power connectors: None vs Legacy. Card length: 160mm vs 168mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 60.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | RADEON 9200 SE |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 70W | 55W-21% |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-14% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | Legacy |
| Length | 160mm | 168mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 1-50% |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | 60-20% |
| Perf/Watt | 153.6+153500% | 0.1 |
Value Analysis
At launch, the GeForce RTX 3050 6GB came in at $169, while the RADEON 9200 SE launched at $30. On MSRP, RADEON 9200 SE was 82.2% cheaper ($139 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 63.6 (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs 0.1 (RADEON 9200 SE) — the GeForce RTX 3050 6GB offers 63500% better value. The newer card here is RADEON 9200 SE (2025 vs 2024).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | RADEON 9200 SE |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $169 | $30-82% |
| Performance per Dollar | 63.6+63500% | 0.1 |
| Codename | GA107 | Strix Halo |
| Release | February 2 2024 | January 6 2025 |
| Ranking | #252 | #98 |
Affiliate Disclosure
ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.
Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce RTX 3050 6GB and RADEON 9200 SE
