Radeon Pro 580 vs GeForce RTX 2050
Radeon Pro 580
Popular choices:
GeForce RTX 2050
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. The Radeon Pro 580 is positioned at rank #93 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Balanced cost-benefit for your build. 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 Radeon Pro 580
Performance Per Dollar GeForce RTX 2050
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 Radeon Pro 580 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon Pro 580 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.5% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce RTX 2050.
| Insight | Radeon Pro 580 | GeForce RTX 2050 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.5%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.5%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Turing (2018−2022)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | ✨ DLSS 3/4 + Frame Gen Support |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon Pro 580 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $150 (vs $150), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 0.5% better value per dollar than the GeForce RTX 2050.
| Insight | Radeon Pro 580 | GeForce RTX 2050 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+0.5%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
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 Radeon Pro 580 and GeForce RTX 2050
Radeon Pro 580
The Radeon Pro 580 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 5 2017. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1100 MHz to 1200 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,753 points.
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.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon Pro 580 scores 7,753 and the GeForce RTX 2050 reaches 7,714 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon Pro 580 is built on GCN 4.0 while the GeForce RTX 2050 uses Turing, both on 14 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 2,304 (Radeon Pro 580) vs 2,944 (GeForce RTX 2050). Raw compute: 5.53 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro 580) vs 10.07 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 2050). Boost clocks: 1200 MHz vs 1710 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon Pro 580 | GeForce RTX 2050 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,753 | 7,714 |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Turing |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 2304 | 2944+28% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 5.53 TFLOPS | 10.07 TFLOPS+82% |
| Boost Clock | 1200 MHz | 1710 MHz+43% |
| ROPs | 32 | 64+100% |
| TMUs | 144 | 184+28% |
| L1 Cache | 0.56 MB | 2.9 MB+418% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 4 MB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon Pro 580 | GeForce RTX 2050 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | DLSS 2.0 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 / AFMF (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR6. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (Radeon Pro 580) vs 4 MB (GeForce RTX 2050) — the GeForce RTX 2050 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon Pro 580 | GeForce RTX 2050 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 4 MB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.0 (Radeon Pro 580) vs 12.2 (GeForce RTX 2050). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Radeon Pro 580 | GeForce RTX 2050 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12.2+2% |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 3.4 (Radeon Pro 580) vs NVENC 8.0 (GeForce RTX 2050). Decoder: UVD 6.3 vs PureVideo HD VP11. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Radeon Pro 580) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) (GeForce RTX 2050).
| Feature | Radeon Pro 580 | GeForce RTX 2050 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 3.4 | NVENC 8.0 |
| Decoder | UVD 6.3 | PureVideo HD VP11 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon Pro 580 draws 150W versus the GeForce RTX 2050's 215W — a 35.6% difference. The Radeon Pro 580 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon Pro 580) vs 300W (GeForce RTX 2050). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 6-pin. Card length: 0mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | Radeon Pro 580 | GeForce RTX 2050 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 150W-30% | 215W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 300W-14% |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 6-pin |
| Length | 0mm | 0mm |
| Height | 0mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 51.7+44% | 35.9 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon Pro 580 launched at $500 MSRP and currently averages $150, while the GeForce RTX 2050 launched at $150 and now averages $150. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 51.7 (Radeon Pro 580) vs 51.4 (GeForce RTX 2050) — the Radeon Pro 580 offers 0.6% better value. The GeForce RTX 2050 is the newer GPU (2018 vs 2017).
| Feature | Radeon Pro 580 | GeForce RTX 2050 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $500 | $150-70% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $150 | $150 |
| Performance per Dollar | 51.7 | 51.4 |
| Codename | Polaris 20 | TU104 |
| Release | June 5 2017 | September 20 2018 |
| Ranking | #327 | #94 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon Pro 580 and GeForce RTX 2050
