OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£700VRAM:4 GBMemory bus width:128 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):57.5 W

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 11 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

5.4/10

Overall score

Score
5.4/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 94% of models
Score components

40%

4.7

Technical score

25%

4.7

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

4.7

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 94% of graphics cards
5.8

Value for money

Value for money
5.8/ 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 98% of models
Score components

70%

5.4

Overall score

30%

6.8

Price

â–¼Worse than 98%
4.7

Technical score

Technical score
4.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
Score components

44%

3.0

Performance

24%

2.3

Memory

12%

9.4

Power

11%

9.0

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

8.9

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 87%
4.7

Reviews score

Reviews score
4.7/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 91% of models

4.7

Mark 7.6 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.4

Average grade

20%

8.6

Popularity

Grades by review (11)
3 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. 8 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 91%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £700
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop

Based on 3 · 9

Reviewers praise ray tracing, DLSS and battery life, but gaming performance splits opinion and limited video memory is the main complaint.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop

Based on 204 owners sharing their experience in online comments

43%positive32%mixed25%negative

Owners appreciate its capable gaming performance, while limited VRAM and uneven frame rates hold it back.

What owners dislike

  • Many owners see frame rates well below expectations, sometimes around 20 to 50 fps in demanding titles, even on low settings.27
  • Four gigabytes of VRAM forces texture and settings compromises, and some games load textures incorrectly or cannot run high-quality textures smoothly.11
  • Some owners report periodic stuttering and frame drops during gameplay, which disrupts smooth play.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop

Technical score
Technical score
4.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
Score components:

44%

3.0

Performance

24%

2.3

Memory

12%

9.4

Power

11%

9.0

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

8.9

Connectivity

4.7
Reviews score
4.7
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
5.8/ 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 98% of models
Score components:

70%

5.4

Overall score

30%

6.8

Price

5.8
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
5,500 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 5,500 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 83.9% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
5,700 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 5,700 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 69.6% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
10,080 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 10,080 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 84.2% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
4,312 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 4,312 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 85.4% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
8.7 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 8.7 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 77.2% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
VRAM
4 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 4 GB of VRAM, which is less than 87.7% of graphics cards and equal to 6% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR6
This graphics card uses GDDR6 memory, which is newer than on 16.4% of graphics cards and equal to 40.3% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
128 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 128 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 68.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 26.7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
192 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 192 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 87.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.5% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
12,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 12,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 80.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.5% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
PCI Express (PCIe) version
4
This graphics card supports PCIe 4, which is newer than on 22.5% of graphics cards and equal to 50.5% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x8
This graphics card uses x8 PCIe lanes, which is fewer than 75.9% of graphics cards and equal to 22.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12 Ultimate
This graphics card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which is more advanced than on 22.8% of graphics cards and equal to 77.2% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.8% of graphics cards and equal to 79.2% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
Max displays supported
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 9% of graphics cards and equal to 88.2% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 90.9% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
?
DisplayPort version
1.4a
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.4a, which is more advanced than on 19.3% of graphics cards and equal to 46.3% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
32.4 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 32.4 Gbps, which is faster than on 56.6% of graphics cards and equal to 20.9% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
57.5 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 57.5 W, which is lower than that of 95.7% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
95 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 95 W under peak load, which is lower than 90.5% of graphics cards and equal to 0.3% 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% of graphics cards and equal to that of 6.1% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
35 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 35 W, which is lower than that of 98.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
35 W
Show more
Size
?
Length
?
Height
?
Slot width
?
Weight
?
Show more

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 73.3% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (57.5 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    57.5 W vs 215 W
  • 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
  • 84.1% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (35 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    35 W vs 220 W
  • 58.3% lower idle power draw
    This graphics card has a lower idle power draw than the average graphics card (5 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    5 W vs 12 W
  • 56.8% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (95 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    95 W vs 220 W
  • 73.3% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (57.5 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    57.5 W vs 215 W
  • 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
  • 84.1% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (35 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    35 W vs 220 W
  • 58.3% lower idle power draw
    This graphics card has a lower idle power draw than the average graphics card (5 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    5 W vs 12 W
  • 56.8% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (95 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    95 W vs 220 W
  • 8 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (4 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    4 GB vs 12 GB
  • 32.3% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,695 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,695 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 61.7% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (735 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    735 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 34.7% lower review score
    Reviews score
    4.7/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 91% of models

    4.7

    Mark 7.6 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.4

    Average grade

    20%

    8.6

    Popularity

    Grades by review (11)
    3 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. 8 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    4.7 vs 7.2
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 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
  • 78.1% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (82.8 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    82.8 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 34.7% lower review score
    Reviews score
    4.7/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 91% of models

    4.7

    Mark 7.6 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.4

    Average grade

    20%

    8.6

    Popularity

    Grades by review (11)
    3 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. 8 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    4.7 vs 7.2
  • 39.7% lower sentiment score
    4.7 vs 7.8
  • 26.8% worse value for money
    NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop has worse value for money than the average graphics card (5.85 vs 7.4).
    5.85 vs 7.41
  • 34.6% more expensive
    NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop is more expensive than the average graphics card (£700 vs £520).
    £700 vs £520
  • 32.3% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,695 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,695 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 61.7% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (735 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    735 MHz vs 1,920 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
  • 78.1% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (82.8 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    82.8 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 79.5% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (33.1 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    33.12 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/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
  • 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
  • 61.5% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (8.7 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    8.7 TFLOPS vs 22.6 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
  • 55.5% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (10,080 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    10,080 points vs 22,638 points
  • 62.8% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (5,500 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    5,500 points vs 14,779 points
  • 2 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2021 vs 2023).
    May 2021
    2021 vs 2023
  • 37.7% lower ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a lower ray tracing score than the average graphics card (5,700 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
    5,700 points vs 9,148 points
  • 83.3% 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.
    0.08 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 64.3% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (4,312 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    4,312 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 70.5% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (8.7 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    8.7 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 8 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (4 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    4 GB vs 12 GB
  • 57.1% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (192 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    192 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 64 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    128 bit vs 192 bit
  • 36.8% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (12,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    12,000 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
  • 14.3% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,500 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,500 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 60% larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (8 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process 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
  • 62% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (8,700 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    8,700 million vs 22,900 million
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.1 vs 2.1a).
    2.1 vs 2.1a
  • No 3D output
    This graphics card does not support 3D output, the average graphics card does.
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats 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
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • 13.1 dB noisier under load
    This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (48.5 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    48.5 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 8 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (75 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    75 °C vs 67 °C
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

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

8.0
The Amazing Content Lab - TACLab
≈ estimated
11/12/2023
Benchmark · 1080p and DLSS tests across several games
Verdict
The RTX 3050 Ti Laptop is a good budget pick for 1080p gaming, but its 4GB of VRAM holds back higher resolutions.
5.0
Houndx
≈ estimated
07/08/2021
Hands-on benchmark · RTX 3050 Ti vs GTX 1660 Ti laptops
Verdict
The RTX 3050 Ti Laptop is hard to justify at its price, since the GTX 1660 Ti laptop is the better buy.
4.0
Hardware Unboxed
≈ estimated
28/07/2021
Hands-on review · game benchmarks and VRAM limits
Verdict
The RTX 3050 Ti Laptop is unimpressive and hard to recommend, mainly because of its 4GB of VRAM.
5.0
Jarrod'sTech
≈ estimated
13/07/2021
Head-to-head comparison · 15 games, thermals and battery tests
Verdict
The RTX 3050 Ti Laptop is playable on medium settings with 4GB of VRAM, but the RTX 3060 is the easier recommendation.
9.0
VerTechHD
≈ estimated
12/07/2021
Gaming performance tests · budget laptop GPU
Verdict
The RTX 3050 Ti Laptop is one of the best new budget laptop GPUs, bringing RTX features and near-universal 1080p gaming at a lower price.
6.0
Jarrod'sTech
≈ estimated
04/06/2021
Head-to-head comparison · 15 games, thermals and battery tests
Verdict
The RTX 3050 Ti Laptop isn't amazing, and it's only worth buying if the price gap is small.
Hands-on video, no verdict
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

7.0
notebookcheck.net
≈ estimated
11/05/2021
Performance test · Gaming laptop chip
Verdict
The GeForce RTX 3050 Ti laptop GPU handles 1080p games such as Apex Legends well, but 4K Ultra settings fall to 15 to 40 FPS.
7.5
techspot.com
✓ explicit
30/07/2021
Hands-on test · Mid-range laptop GPU
Verdict
The GeForce RTX 3050 Ti laptop GPU roughly matches an RTX 2060 at 1080p, but its 4 GB of memory limits demanding games and ray tracing.
7.0
notebookcheck.com
≈ estimated
11/05/2021
Benchmark test · Laptop gaming GPU
Verdict
The GeForce RTX 3050 Ti laptop GPU runs many 1080p games at 70 to 110 FPS, but 4K Ultra settings drop to 15 to 40 FPS.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop

  • Solid 1080p performance for mainstream and eSports gaming
  • Support for modern features like DLSS and Ray Tracing
  • Low power consumption compared to higher-end 30-series cards
  • Great value for budget-conscious users and creators
  • Includes 5th Gen NVENC encoder for high-quality streaming
  • Suitable for ultra-portable and thin-and-light laptop designs

What customers don't like about NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop

  • Limited 4GB VRAM significantly bottlenecks performance in modern AAA titles
  • Ray tracing performance is often unplayable without DLSS enabled
  • Performance is frequently outperformed by the older RTX 2060 or GTX 1660 Ti in high-texture scenarios
  • Large performance gap compared to the RTX 3060 Laptop GPU
  • Poor future-proofing due to low memory capacity
  • Performance drops sharply at resolutions above 1080p

Verdict

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU is an entry-level graphics card based on the Ampere architecture (GA107 chip), featuring 2560 CUDA cores, 80 Tensor cores, and 20 RT cores with a variable TGP ranging from 35W to 80W. Built on an 8nm process, it includes 4GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, offering a memory bandwidth of 88 GB/s and boost clock speeds up to 1695 MHz. Its main pros include reliable 1080p gaming performance for esports titles, support for advanced features like DLSS and real-time ray tracing, and high power efficiency suitable for thin-and-light laptops. However, its primary cons are the restrictive 4GB VRAM, which struggles with modern AAA titles at high settings, and performance that is significantly outclassed by the RTX 3060.

Compare NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop 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 NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found