Radeon R9 M295X vs GeForce GTX 1050 3GB
Radeon R9 M295X
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 1050 3GB
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 R9 M295X is positioned at rank #273 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower 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 R9 M295X
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB uses modern memory architecture. The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Radeon R9 M295X lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R9 M295X is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.7% higher G3D Mark score and 33.3% more VRAM (4 GB vs 3 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB.
| Insight | Radeon R9 M295X | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.7%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+33.3%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $60 versus $150 for the Radeon R9 M295X, it costs 60% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 148.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon R9 M295X | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+148.3%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($150) | ✅More affordable ($60) |
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 R9 M295X and GeForce GTX 1050 3GB
Radeon R9 M295X
The Radeon R9 M295X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 23 2014. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 723 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,150 points.
GeForce GTX 1050 3GB
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 21 2018. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1392 MHz to 1518 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,116 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R9 M295X scores 5,150 and the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB reaches 5,116 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R9 M295X is built on GCN 3.0 while the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB uses Pascal, both on 28 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (Radeon R9 M295X) vs 768 (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB). Raw compute: 2.961 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 M295X) vs 2.332 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB).
| Feature | Radeon R9 M295X | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 5,150 | 5,116 |
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | Pascal |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 2048+167% | 768 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.961 TFLOPS+27% | 2.332 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32+33% | 24 |
| TMUs | 128+167% | 48 |
| L1 Cache | 512 KB+78% | 288 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 768 KB+50% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R9 M295X | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Radeon R9 M295X comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB has 3 GB. The Radeon R9 M295X offers 33.3% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 176 GB/s (Radeon R9 M295X) vs 84 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) — a 109.5% advantage for the Radeon R9 M295X. Bus width: 256-bit vs 96-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (Radeon R9 M295X) vs 768 KB (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) — the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M295X | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+33% | 3 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 176 GB/s+110% | 84 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 256-bit+167% | 96-bit |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 768 KB+50% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (Radeon R9 M295X) vs 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB). Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 3.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M295X | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12 (12_1) |
| Max Displays | 0 | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 3.0 (Radeon R9 M295X) vs NVENC 6.0 (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB). Decoder: UVD 4.2 vs NVDEC 3.0.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M295X | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 3.0 | NVENC 6.0 |
| Decoder | UVD 4.2 | NVDEC 3.0 |
| Codecs | — | H.264,H.265,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R9 M295X draws 250W versus the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB's 75W — a 107.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon R9 M295X) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB). Power connectors: Mobile vs None. Card length: 1mm vs 145mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M295X | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 250W | 75W-70% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 300W-14% |
| Power Connector | Mobile | None |
| Length | 1mm | 145mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 65 |
| Perf/Watt | 20.6 | 68.2+231% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R9 M295X launched at $300 MSRP and currently averages $150, while the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB launched at $129 and now averages $60. The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB costs 60% less ($90 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 34.3 (Radeon R9 M295X) vs 85.3 (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) — the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB offers 148.7% better value. The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB is the newer GPU (2018 vs 2014).
| Feature | Radeon R9 M295X | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $300 | $129-57% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $150 | $60-60% |
| Performance per Dollar | 34.3 | 85.3+149% |
| Codename | Amethyst | GP107 |
| Release | November 23 2014 | May 21 2018 |
| Ranking | #437 | #440 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon R9 M295X and GeForce GTX 1050 3GB
