Component comparison

GeForce GTX 1050 vs RTX A1000

GeForce GTX 1050 vs RTX A1000 โ€” detailed GPU comparison: performance, gaming FPS, specifications.

Advantages

A GeForce GTX 1050
  • + Memory clock (MHz) (+5508 MHz)
  • + TGP / TDP (W) (+25 W)
B RTX A1000
  • + Release year (+7)
  • + VRAM (GB) (+6 GB)
  • + Bandwidth (GB/s) (+112 GB/s)
  • + Lithography (nm) (-6 nm)
  • + CUDA cores (+1536)
  • + TMUs (+24)
  • + ROPs (+8)
  • + FP32 performance (TFLOPS) (+4.52 TFLOPS)
  • + Energy efficiency (+28.9)
  • + PassMark (overall) (+5705)
  • + Geekbench OpenCL (+36215)
  • + Geekbench Vulkan (+34678)
  • + Normalized score (+25.9)

Detailed spec comparison

Spec Component A
GeForce GTX 1050
Component B
RTX A1000
Release year 2017 2024 (+7)
VRAM (GB) 2 GB 8 GB (+6 GB)
Memory type GDDR5 GDDR6
Memory clock (MHz) 7008 MHz (+5508 MHz) 1500 MHz
Bandwidth (GB/s) 112 GB/s 224 GB/s (+112 GB/s)
Memory bus (bit) 128 bit 128 bit
TGP / TDP (W) 75 W (+25 W) 50 W
Lithography (nm) 14 nm 8 nm (-6 nm)
Transistors (M) 3,300M โ€”
Die size (mmยฒ) 132 mmยฒ โ€”
Base clock (MHz) โ€” โ€”
Boost clock (MHz) โ€” โ€”
CUDA cores 768 2,304 (+1536)
TMUs 48 72 (+24)
ROPs 24 32 (+8)
RT cores โ€” 18
Tensor cores โ€” 72
FP32 performance (TFLOPS) 2.21 TFLOPS 6.74 TFLOPS (+4.52 TFLOPS)
Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) 46.56 GPixel/s โ€”
Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) 58.20 GTexel/s โ€”
Energy efficiency 11.0 39.9 (+28.9)
PassMark (overall) 5,048 10,753 (+5705)
3DMark Time Spy โ€” โ€”
3DMark Fire Strike 6,068 โ€”
Geekbench OpenCL 17,429 53,644 (+36215)
Geekbench Vulkan 15,766 50,444 (+34678)
Normalized score 31.3 57.2 (+25.9)

Only in component B

DLSS ReBAR

In both

CUDA

FPS in games (1080p)

Game GeForce GTX 1050 RTX A1000 Delta
CS:GO 240 FPS 240 FPS โ‰ˆ
GTA V 140 FPS 140 FPS โ‰ˆ
Overwatch 240 FPS 240 FPS โ‰ˆ
PUBG 140 FPS 140 FPS โ‰ˆ

Specs from public sources (PassMark, Geekbench). FPS measured at 1080p medium settings.

Based on the comparison: RTX A1000 wins 13 of the comparable criteria. The choice depends on your use case.

๐Ÿค” How to choose

Universal advice for any use case.

  • Reliability vs price: reliability (median 50) โ†” price (median 385.1).
  • Weight vs CPU: mobility (median 48) โ†” overall performance (median 49.8).
  • Upgradeability vs battery: upgradability (median 50) โ†” battery life (median 2.8).

Reviews & specs

Your journey

based on your activity
Refining requirements
You're refining โ€” compare finalists head-to-head.
Focused on
Performance
20%
Mobility
20%
Refine your picks
An anonymous cookie on your device โ€” no account, no personal data. Viewed models, compares and picker answers shape this panel.
Delete profile? Compare list stays.