
GeForce RTX 3050 6GB
Popular choices:

Radeon R5 430
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
- ✅+1113.2% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Delivers 323.5% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 63.6 vs 15.0 G3D/$ ($169 MSRP vs $59 MSRP).
- ✅Access to DLSS 2 Super Resolution (2020).
- ✅1100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 512 MB).
- ✅More future proof: Ampere (2020−2025) on 8nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌133.3% higher power demand at 70W vs 30W.
Radeon R5 430
2016Why buy it
- ✅Costs $110 less on MSRP ($59 MSRP vs $169 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 30W instead of 70W, a 40W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (886 vs 10,749).
- ❌Less VRAM, with 512 MB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌No DLSS support; it relies on FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 (2025) instead.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2016-era hardware with 512 MB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 15.0 vs 63.6 G3D/$ ($59 MSRP vs $169 MSRP).
GeForce RTX 3050 6GB
2024Radeon R5 430
2016Why buy it
- ✅+1113.2% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Delivers 323.5% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 63.6 vs 15.0 G3D/$ ($169 MSRP vs $59 MSRP).
- ✅Access to DLSS 2 Super Resolution (2020).
- ✅1100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 512 MB).
- ✅More future proof: Ampere (2020−2025) on 8nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Why buy it
- ✅Costs $110 less on MSRP ($59 MSRP vs $169 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 30W instead of 70W, a 40W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌133.3% higher power demand at 70W vs 30W.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (886 vs 10,749).
- ❌Less VRAM, with 512 MB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌No DLSS support; it relies on FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 (2025) instead.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2016-era hardware with 512 MB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 15.0 vs 63.6 G3D/$ ($59 MSRP vs $169 MSRP).
Quick Answers
So, is GeForce RTX 3050 6GB better than Radeon R5 430?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
Is Radeon R5 430 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 | Radeon R5 430 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 85 FPS | 11 FPS |
| medium | 72 FPS | 7 FPS |
| high | 60 FPS | 4 FPS |
| ultra | 40 FPS | 2 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 74 FPS | 7 FPS |
| medium | 64 FPS | 4 FPS |
| high | 47 FPS | 2 FPS |
| ultra | 30 FPS | 1 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 27 FPS | 3 FPS |
| medium | 25 FPS | 2 FPS |
| high | 17 FPS | 1 FPS |
| ultra | 15 FPS | 1 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | Radeon R5 430 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 174 FPS | 23 FPS |
| medium | 149 FPS | 10 FPS |
| high | 118 FPS | 7 FPS |
| ultra | 87 FPS | 5 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 129 FPS | 7 FPS |
| medium | 106 FPS | 3 FPS |
| high | 83 FPS | 2 FPS |
| ultra | 62 FPS | 2 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 74 FPS | 2 FPS |
| medium | 62 FPS | 1 FPS |
| high | 48 FPS | 1 FPS |
| ultra | 34 FPS | 1 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | Radeon R5 430 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 484 FPS | 40 FPS |
| medium | 387 FPS | 32 FPS |
| high | 322 FPS | 27 FPS |
| ultra | 242 FPS | 20 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 363 FPS | 30 FPS |
| medium | 290 FPS | 24 FPS |
| high | 242 FPS | 20 FPS |
| ultra | 181 FPS | 15 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 242 FPS | 20 FPS |
| medium | 193 FPS | 16 FPS |
| high | 161 FPS | 13 FPS |
| ultra | 121 FPS | 10 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | Radeon R5 430 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 243 FPS | 40 FPS |
| medium | 210 FPS | 32 FPS |
| high | 171 FPS | 19 FPS |
| ultra | 144 FPS | 13 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 185 FPS | 5 FPS |
| medium | 166 FPS | 3 FPS |
| high | 131 FPS | 3 FPS |
| ultra | 109 FPS | 2 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 104 FPS | 3 FPS |
| medium | 87 FPS | 2 FPS |
| high | 69 FPS | 2 FPS |
| ultra | 55 FPS | 1 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce RTX 3050 6GB and Radeon R5 430

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.

Radeon R5 430
Radeon R5 430
The Radeon R5 430 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 15 2016. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 780 MHz to 1030 MHz. It has 320 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 886 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce RTX 3050 6GB scores 10,749 versus the Radeon R5 430's 886 — the GeForce RTX 3050 6GB leads by 1113.2%. The GeForce RTX 3050 6GB is built on Ampere while the Radeon R5 430 uses GCN 1.0, both on 8 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 2,304 (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs 320 (Radeon R5 430). Raw compute: 6.774 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs 0.6592 TFLOPS (Radeon R5 430). Boost clocks: 1470 MHz vs 1030 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | Radeon R5 430 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 10,749+1113% | 886 |
| Architecture | Ampere | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 8 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2304+620% | 320 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 6.774 TFLOPS+928% | 0.6592 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1470 MHz+43% | 1030 MHz |
| ROPs | 32+300% | 8 |
| TMUs | 72+260% | 20 |
| L1 Cache | 2.3 MB+2775% | 0.08 MB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+1438% | 0.13 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 Radeon R5 430 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | Radeon R5 430 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 comes with 6 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R5 430 has 512 MB. The GeForce RTX 3050 6GB offers 1100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 96-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs 0.13 MB (Radeon R5 430) — the GeForce RTX 3050 6GB has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | Radeon R5 430 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 6 GB+1100% | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 168 GB/s | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 96-bit | 128-bit+33% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+1438% | 0.13 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs 12 (11_1) (Radeon R5 430). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | Radeon R5 430 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate | 12 (11_1) |
| Vulkan | 1.3+8% | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4+100% | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC (5th Gen) (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs None (Radeon R5 430). Decoder: NVDEC (7th Gen) vs UVD 4.0. Supported codecs: H.264,HEVC,AV1 (Decode Only) (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs H.264,MPEG-4,VC-1,MPEG-2 (Radeon R5 430).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | Radeon R5 430 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC (5th Gen) | None |
| Decoder | NVDEC (7th Gen) | UVD 4.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,HEVC,AV1 (Decode Only) | H.264,MPEG-4,VC-1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce RTX 3050 6GB draws 70W versus the Radeon R5 430's 30W — a 80% difference. The Radeon R5 430 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs 350W (Radeon R5 430). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 160mm vs 168mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 75.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | Radeon R5 430 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 70W | 30W-57% |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-14% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 160mm | 168mm |
| Height | — | 69mm |
| Slots | 2 | 1-50% |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | 75 |
| Perf/Watt | 153.6+421% | 29.5 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce RTX 3050 6GB launched at $169 MSRP, while the Radeon R5 430 launched at $59. The Radeon R5 430 costs 65.1% less ($110 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 63.6 (GeForce RTX 3050 6GB) vs 15.0 (Radeon R5 430) — the GeForce RTX 3050 6GB offers 324% better value. The GeForce RTX 3050 6GB is the newer GPU (2024 vs 2016).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3050 6GB | Radeon R5 430 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $169 | $59-65% |
| Performance per Dollar | 63.6+324% | 15.0 |
| Codename | GA107 | Jet |
| Release | February 2 2024 | May 15 2016 |
| Ranking | #252 | #922 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












