OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v1.0
Graphics cards Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v1.0: technical specifications plus authentic consumer ratings, with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v1.0

ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 3050 Review | 118 Data compared

Avg. price:~£180VRAM:8 GBMemory bus width:128 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):130 W

ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 3050 Review: Compare 118 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 3050
5.4/10

Overall score

Score
5.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the graphics card's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best graphics cards on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
Score components

90%

5.2

Technical score

10%

7.5

User score

â–¼Worse than 81% of graphics cards
6.7

Value for money

Value for money
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
Score components

70%

5.4

Overall score

30%

9.6

Price

â–¼Worse than 74%
5.2

Technical score

Technical score
5.2/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Graphics cards category across these key areas: Performance, Memory, Platform & Features, Connectivity & Media, Power & Cooling, Design.
When it matters
When you want to compare graphics cards based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
Score components

44%

3.6

Performance

24%

3.4

Memory

12%

8.8

Power & Cooling

11%

9.4

Platform & Features

5%

9.5

Design

4%

6.4

Connectivity & Media

â–¼Worse than 81%
7.5

User score

User score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 92% of models
Score components

70%

9.4

User ratings

30%

3.1

Number of reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
â–¼Worse than 92%
  • asus-dual-geforce-rtx-3050
  • asus-dual-geforce-rtx-3050
  • asus-dual-geforce-rtx-3050
  • asus-dual-geforce-rtx-3050
  • asus-dual-geforce-rtx-3050
  • asus-dual-geforce-rtx-3050
  • asus-dual-geforce-rtx-3050
  • asus-dual-geforce-rtx-3050
  • asus-dual-geforce-rtx-3050
asus-dual-geforce-rtx-3050
asus-dual-geforce-rtx-3050
asus-dual-geforce-rtx-3050
asus-dual-geforce-rtx-3050
asus-dual-geforce-rtx-3050
asus-dual-geforce-rtx-3050
asus-dual-geforce-rtx-3050
asus-dual-geforce-rtx-3050
asus-dual-geforce-rtx-3050
Best prices
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 3050

Technical score
Technical score
5.2/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Graphics cards category across these key areas: Performance, Memory, Platform & Features, Connectivity & Media, Power & Cooling, Design.
When it matters
When you want to compare graphics cards based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
Score components:

44%

3.6

Performance

24%

3.4

Memory

12%

8.8

Power & Cooling

11%

9.4

Platform & Features

5%

9.5

Design

4%

6.4

Connectivity & Media

5.2
User score
User score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 92% of models
Score components

70%

9.4

User ratings

30%

3.1

Number of reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
7.5
Popularity
Popularity
3.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you prefer a graphics card that has already been chosen and reviewed by many other users.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 54% of models
Popularity:
ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 3050 has a popularity score of 3.1 points, which is lower than that of 53.4% of products in this category.
3.1
Value for money
Value for money
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
Score components:

70%

5.4

Overall score

30%

9.6

Price

6.7
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
6,200 points
Market range: <4k points – >34k points
This graphics card scores 6,200 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 82.2% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
3,609 points
Market range: <0 points – >25k points
This graphics card scores 3,609 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 76.4% of graphics cards and equal to 0.6% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
12,532 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 12,532 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 80.1% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
6,459 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 6,459 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 77.4% of graphics cards.
Floating-point performance
9.1 TFLOPS
Market range: <4.38 TFLOPS – >57.42 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 9.1 TFLOPS floating-point performance, which is lower than that of 76.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.2% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
8 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >24 GB
This graphics card has 8 GB of VRAM, which is less than 57.5% of graphics cards and equal to 25.1% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR6
GDDR version
GDDR6
This graphics card uses GDDR6 memory, which is newer than on 15.9% of graphics cards and equal to 40.3% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
128 bit
Market range: <64 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 128 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 69.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 26% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
224 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 224 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 83.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.6% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
4
This graphics card supports PCIe 4, which is newer than on 22.3% of graphics cards and equal to 52.1% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x8
This graphics card uses x8 PCIe lanes, which is fewer than 76.7% of graphics cards and equal to 22.2% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12 Ultimate
This graphics card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which is more advanced than on 22.6% of graphics cards and equal to 77.4% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.7% of graphics cards and equal to 79.3% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 1.9% of graphics cards and equal to 98.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
3
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 3 displays, which is fewer than 91.8% of graphics cards and equal to 5.9% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 91% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
1
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 1 DisplayPort outputs, which is fewer than 88.7% of graphics cards and equal to 8.6% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.4a
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.4a, which is more advanced than on 19.5% of graphics cards and equal to 47.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
16.2 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 16.2 Gbps, which is slower than on 58.4% of graphics cards and equal to 2% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
130 W
Market range: <60 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 130 W, which is lower than that of 79.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 3.2% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
130 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card draws 130 W under peak load, which is lower than 80.8% of graphics cards and equal to 3.4% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
450 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 450 W PSU, which is lower than that of 84.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 6% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
140 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 140 W, which is lower than that of 79.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.9% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
130 W
Show more
Size
200x 123x 38 mm
This graphics card measures 200x123x 38 mm, which is more compact than 94.5% of graphics cards and equal in size to 0.5% of graphics cards.
Length
200 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >350 mm
This graphics card is 200 mm long, which is shorter than 89.9% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.7% of graphics cards.
Height
123 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 123 mm tall, which is shorter than 55.3% of graphics cards and equal in height to 0.7% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2 slot/s, which is slimmer than 53.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 42.5% of graphics cards.
Weight
408 g
Market range: <500 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 408 g, which is lighter than 94.9% of graphics cards and equal in weight to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more

ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 3050 vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryPlatform & FeaturesConnectivity & MediaPower & CoolingDesign
  • 30.8% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (450 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    450 W vs 650 W
  • 39.5% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (130 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    130 W vs 215 W
  • 85 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (200 mm vs 285 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 285 mm.
    200 mm vs 285 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • More compact card size
    This graphics card is more compact than the average graphics card (200x123 x 38 mm vs 285x127 x 52 mm). The average graphics card has a size of 285x127 x 52 mm.
    200x123 x 38 mm vs 285x127 x 52 mm
  • 37.8% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (140 W vs 225 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 225 W.
    140 W vs 225 W
  • 1 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    1 vs 0
  • Includes LHR limiter
    This graphics card includes an LHR limiter, the average graphics card does not.
  • 2.94x cheaper
    ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 3050 is cheaper than the average graphics card (£180 vs £530).
    £180 vs £530
  • Includes LHR limiter
    This graphics card includes an LHR limiter, the average graphics card does not.
  • 1 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    1 vs 0
  • 30.8% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (450 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    450 W vs 650 W
  • 39.5% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (130 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    130 W vs 215 W
  • 37.8% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (140 W vs 225 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 225 W.
    140 W vs 225 W
  • 9 °C lower load temperature
    This graphics card has a lower load temperature than the average graphics card (58 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    58 °C vs 67 °C
  • 85 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (200 mm vs 285 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 285 mm.
    200 mm vs 285 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • More compact card size
    This graphics card is more compact than the average graphics card (200x123 x 38 mm vs 285x127 x 52 mm). The average graphics card has a size of 285x127 x 52 mm.
    200x123 x 38 mm vs 285x127 x 52 mm
  • 60% lighter card weight
    This graphics card is lighter than the average graphics card (408 g vs 1021 g). The average graphics card weighs 1021 g.
    408 g vs 1,021 g
  • 128 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
    128 bit vs 256 bit
  • 26.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1852 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    1,852 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 20 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (20 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    20 vs 40
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 104 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (80 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    80 vs 184
  • 1 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
    2 vs 3
  • 62.7% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (142.2 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 381.2 GTexel/s.
    142.2 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s
  • 20 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (20 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    20 vs 40
  • 6.6% lower user score
    User score
    7.5/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
    When it matters
    When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
    Score distribution
    ▼▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 3050
    the average graphics card
    ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 3050 has a lower user score than the average graphics card (7.50 vs 8.000).
    7.5 vs 8
  • 7.7% worse value for money
    ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 3050 has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.68 vs 7.2).
    6.68 vs 7.2
  • 26.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1852 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    1,852 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 20 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (20 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    20 vs 40
  • 104 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (80 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    80 vs 184
  • 62.7% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (142.2 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 381.2 GTexel/s.
    142.2 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s
  • 20 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (20 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    20 vs 40
  • 71.2% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (47 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 163.2 GPixel/s.
    47.04 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s
  • 32 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (32 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    32 vs 64
  • 19.2% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1552 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,552 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 59.7% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (9.1 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.57 TFLOPS.
    9.1 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS
  • 64 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (80 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    80 vs 144
  • 44.7% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (12532 points vs 22653 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22653 points.
    12,532 points vs 22,653 points
  • 57.8% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (6200 points vs 14678.5 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14678.5 points.
    6,200 points vs 14,678.5 points
  • 60.6% lower ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a lower ray tracing score than the average graphics card (3609 points vs 9166 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9166 points.
    3,609 points vs 9,166 points
  • 69.4% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (9.1 TFLOPS vs 29.7 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.725 TFLOPS.
    9.1 TFLOPS vs 29.725 TFLOPS
  • 70.8% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0.1 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.14 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 60.4% lower compute throughput
    This graphics card has a lower compute throughput than the average graphics card (9.1 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has compute throughput of 22.98 TFLOPS.
    9.1 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS
  • 46.5% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (6459 points vs 12074 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12074 points.
    6,459 points vs 12,074 points
  • 128 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
    128 bit vs 256 bit
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 50% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (224 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    224 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 26.3% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (14000 MHz vs 19000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19000 MHz.
    14,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 91.7% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (2 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    2 MB vs 24 MB
  • 60% larger process node
    This graphics card has a higher process node than the average graphics card (8 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a process node of 5 nm.
    8 nm vs 5 nm
  • Fewer PCIe lanes
    This graphics card has fewer PCIe lanes than the average graphics card (x8 vs x16). The average graphics card has x16 PCIe lanes.
    x8 vs x16
  • Older encoder generation
    This graphics card uses an older encoder generation than the average graphics card (7 vs 8). The average graphics card uses encoder generation 8.
    7 vs 8
  • 1 older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2022 vs 2023).
    January 2022
    2,022 vs 2,023
  • 47.6% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (12000 million vs 22900 million). The average graphics card has 22900 million transistors.
    12,000 million vs 22,900 million
  • 2 fewer DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has fewer DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    1 vs 3
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
    No vs yes
  • 1 fewer displays supported
    This graphics card supports fewer displays than the average graphics card (3 vs 4). The average graphics card supports 4 displays.
    3 vs 4
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • No 3D output
    This graphics card does not support 3D output, the average graphics card does.
  • Narrower encode codec support
    This graphics card supports narrower hardware encode codec support than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265/AV1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265/AV1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Older NVDEC generation
    This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (5 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
    5 vs 6
  • 1 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
    2 vs 3
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

W
wepc.com
06/09/2024
Summary of the review
ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 3050 OC review - WePC

Third-party reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
Reviews last updated: June 2026 · How we calculate this

What we like about ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 3050

  • Solid 1080p performance in most modern titles and high frame rates in esports games.
  • Excellent thermal and acoustic performance; runs very cool and remains quiet even under heavy load.
  • Compact dual-slot design ensures compatibility with smaller PC cases.
  • Low power consumption (130W TDP) makes it compatible with budget-friendly power supplies.
  • NVIDIA feature set advantages, including DLSS for performance boosts and NVENC for high-quality streaming.
  • Reliable build quality featuring a metal backplate and IP5X dust-resistant fans.

What we don't like about ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 3050

  • Poor value proposition; often priced higher than AMD alternatives like the RX 6600, which offers better raw performance.
  • VRAM limitations (8GB or 6GB models) struggle with the highest settings in newer, more demanding games.
  • Ray tracing performance is technically available but often too weak for practical use in most titles.
  • Limited performance headroom means it is unlikely to age well as game requirements increase.
  • Minimal performance gains over much older cards like the GTX 1660 Ti in non-DLSS scenarios.
  • The 6GB version is significantly downclocked and performs worse than the standard 8GB model.

Verdict

The Asus Dual GeForce RTX 3050 is a compact 2-slot graphics card built on NVIDIA's Ampere architecture, featuring 2560 CUDA cores and 8GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with a 130W TDP. Key characteristics include a dual Axial-tech fan design for efficient cooling, 0dB technology for silent operation during light loads, and a protective backplate. Its main pros include strong 1080p gaming performance, support for AI-driven DLSS and 2nd Gen Ray Tracing, and broad compatibility with small chassis due to its 20cm length. However, cons include poor price-to-performance value compared to rivals like the RX 6600, limited 1440p capabilities, and the existence of a significantly weaker 6GB variant that lacks an external power connector but offers 25% less memory bandwidth.

Compare ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 3050 with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 3050 and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found