Why you can trust Tom's Hardware
Compared to the three-and-a-half-year-old RTX 3050 8GB, the RTX 5050 is a solid improvement - and it certainly ought to be, given that Nvidia didn't make an RTX 4050 for the desktop in the meantime. The baby Blackwell card is 60% faster on average than its entry-level Ampere predecessor in our raster results at 1080p (all without any help from DLSS or MFG).
If you squint, the 5050 brings RTX 4060 performance to a $50 lower price point, and given that the 4060 is the most popular graphics card on Steam right now, that sounds like a potentially appealing combo on paper.
Stacked up against other Blackwell cards, though, the RTX 5050 looks less impressive as a generational improvement. The RTX 5060 turns out 20% higher frames per watt at 1080p for raster titles despite consuming just 10% more power in our real-world tests, which emphasizes just how much of Blackwell's perf-per-watt improvements come from the use of GDDR7 at the board level.
The RTX 5050 doesn't suck down power by any means, but it's slightly less efficient than even the RTX 4060 despite being a generation newer. Oops.
If the RTX 5050 was priced in proportion to its raw performance gap with the RTX 5060, our results suggest it really should be a $229 card. At that price point, it would make life extremely difficult for the Arc B570 and B580 for 1080p gaming, and it wouldn't face any AMD competition at all in most markets.
For the $249 Nvidia wants for these cards in reality, we think the 5050 is an overpriced, relatively inefficient product that faces tough challengers from AMD and Intel alike, as well as more appealing options within Nvidia's own lineup. It also feels insulting that this card can't consistently deliver the Blackwell architecture's marquee experiences.
DLSS Multi-Frame Generation sometimes just doesn't work on the RTX 5050 in the titles that could really use the boost, because those demanding games already eat up all of the 5050's 8GB of VRAM, leaving no room for the MFG AI model to reside in local memory.
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
If you end up with an RTX 5050 in a pre-built system or because you received one as a gift, you certainly won't have a bad time with it at 1080p. Outside of Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024, which really, really wants a powerful GPU with 16GB of VRAM to deliver anything approaching consistent performance even at 1080p, we had a perfectly fine time with 1080p gaming on the RTX 5050. The Gigabyte card we tested runs cool and quiet, too, so it's easy to live with. But if you have any say in the matter, you can do much better for yourself by saving up and spending just a bit more money.
The real spoiler for every $300-or-less graphics card available right now is AMD's Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB, which has consistently been available for $269 on Amazon of late. At that price point—$30 under its $299 MSRP—it delivers 25% higher frame rates on average than the RTX 5050 for just 8% more money. In raster games that aren't limited by VRAM, which describes many of today's most popular titles on the PC at 1080p, the 9060 XT wipes the floor with everything further down the ladder, and it isn't even close.
Try to render games at a native 1440p, and the 9060 XT 8GB does start to show some cracks, as evidenced by its 1% low frame rates. Of course, you can get around those challenges by lowering settings a bit, using FSR 4 upscaling, or both. You can usually work around 8GB of VRAM in general, but you can't add more raw compute horsepower to begin with, and the RX 9060 XT 8GB has the most raw muscle per dollar of anything on the market if you find it on sale.
If you prefer to stay in the green team's corner to keep access to DLSS 4 and MFG, the RTX 5060 makes a strong case for itself at $300. It delivers 27% higher performance than the RTX 5050 at 1080p for 20% more money. This card's high standings in our overall results at 1080p (and 1440p) show that even if the RX 9060 XT 8GB can outrun and outgun it from time to time, the 5060 hits back by maintaining a more consistent level of performance across our test suite, even as the 9060 XT 8GB sometimes stumbles.
Pair that consistently high performance with wickedly good power efficiency, and it's easy to understand why the RTX 5060 is storming up the Steam Hardware Survey charts of late.
Despite its age, Intel's Arc B580 stays in the affordable gaming fight thanks to some recent price decreases. It can finally be had for its $249 MSRP from some Intel board partners on Newegg. It still delivers solid enough gaming performance at both 1080p and 1440p, along with an ample 12GB of VRAM for better game compatibility across a wider range of resolutions and settings.
The challenge for Intel is that Battlemage can exhibit big performance falloffs even in extremely popular games that aren't VRAM-limited (like Fortnite) that sometimes put it behind even the RTX 5050. Those performance cliffs make it tough to generally recommend.
You really need to make sure your favorite titles play well on Arc before buying a B580 (or B570), and you need to be prepared for the possibility that future titles might not run as well as you'd expect. And that's before we touch on Battlemage's power efficiency, which trails everything but the RDNA 3 cards we tested. For the money, though, you might not care.
Putting the spotlight back on the RTX 5050, this card feels like something Nvidia had to make to keep its system integrator partners happy rather than something it really wanted to put on store shelves for enthusiasts.
The Dells, HPs, and Lenovos of the world that need to build cheap gaming PCs for buyers at Wal-Mart and Best Buy now have access to a product that says RTX 50 rather than RTX 30 on the shelf sticker, and for more casual audiences who mostly spend time in wildly popular free-to-play games like Counter-Strike 2, Fortnite, Apex Legends, or Marvel Rivals, this card provides a much-needed performance boost over the ancient RTX 3050. But price-conscious enthusiasts who are waiting for a true no-compromise, game-changing product around the $250 mark are still going to find themselves tapping their feet.
- MORE: Best Graphics Cards
- MORE: GPU Benchmarks and Hierarchy
- MORE: All Graphics Content
Current page: Nvidia RTX 5050: Conclusions
Prev Page Nvidia RTX 5050 Power, temps, clocks, and efficiency
As the Senior Analyst, Graphics at Tom's Hardware, Jeff Kampman covers everything to do with GPUs, gaming performance, and more. From integrated graphics processors to discrete graphics cards to the hyperscale installations powering our AI future, if it's got a GPU in it, Jeff is on it.
-
Neilbob
Yes, indeed.Notton said:Geforce Give-me-my-money RTX 5050
$150 performance levels at best.
For the tiny number and type of games I play these days, 8GB and this performance level is perfectly sufficient, but NOT at this stupid price.
I wonder if we will ever again see a properly priced budget GPU segment (not what should be mid-range). I'm kind of hoping AMD will churn out something, but I think we all know that isn't going to happen. And I'm still not quite prepared to hold my breath on Intel.
My current system is pushing 6. It is starting to make me nervous... -
usertests RTX 5050... a necessary update
It's basically a 4060 or a little slower, with worse efficiency. This review is actually more positive than some of the launch reviews I saw, which had it losing even more performance and efficiency against the 4060. Perhaps the Blackwell drivers have improved between launch and this late review.
That along with the 5060 shockingly having greater performance per dollar, as well as the unloved 9060 XT 8 GB annihilating it at similar pricing, shows that it's unnecessary.
The 5050 is so close to the 4060 that I bet a silently introduced GDDR7 desktop variant could raise the efficiency and maybe even the performance to above the 4060, even if the effect was as low as 0-5%. I believe efficiency is the reason why the laptop 5050s are getting GDDR7 instead of the GDDR6 in this one. The desktop 5050 card is truly a second class citizen. -
bourgeoisdude "The Dells, HPs, and Lenovos of the world that need to build cheap gaming PCs for buyers at Wal-Mart and Best Buy now have access to a product that says RTX 50 rather than RTX 30 on the shelf sticker..."Reply
^Well said; this is exactly what this card is for. At least this means less GTX 3050s in 'new' gaming PCs. But yeah the GTX 5050 is not really meant for the Toms Hardware audience. -
8086
No.Notton said:Geforce Give-me-my-money RTX 5050
$150 performance levels at best.
This was a $79 card before the pandemic hit. -
LordVile
No it’s not, stop pretending it’s 15 years ago. Things are more expensive in general and even a 1030 was $79 at launch. And that thing lost to iGPUs. The 5050 had increased the same percentage as every other product8086 said:No.
This was a $79 card before the pandemic hit. -
atomicWAR
Fair point but prices have increased well past inflation as well though. Ngreedia has to milk and all. All skus are also one lowered down by at least one sku too. 90 replaced 80 (by die size and perfomance metrics), 80 replaced 70ti, 70ti replaced 70, 70 replaced 60ti, 60ti replaced 60, 60 replaced 50 and 50 replaced 30. It is well documented shrinkflation hit nvidia gpus. Either way we have been getting screwed as consumers by Ngreedia (amd as well)LordVile said:No it’s not, stop pretending it’s 15 years ago.
2tJpe3Dk7Ko:2View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2tJpe3Dk7Ko&t=2s -
LordVile
90 replaced the Titan not the 80 so your entire point is mootatomicWAR said:Fair point but prices have increased well past inflation as well though. Ngreedia has to milk and all. All skus are also one lowered down by at least one sku too. 90 replaced 80 (by die size and perfomance metrics), 80 replaced 70ti, 70ti replaced 70, 70 replaced 60ti, 60ti replaced 60, 60 replaced 50 and 50 replaced 30. It is well documented shrinkflation hit nvidia gpus. Either way we have been getting screwed as consumers by Ngreedia (amd as well)
2tJpe3Dk7Ko:2View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2tJpe3Dk7Ko&t=2s -
atomicWAR
Watch the video. I am talking silicon used, performance upticks etc. So no the 90 didn't replace the titan...it replaced the 80 class. Try again with a good source like I did, please. If you can prove me wrong with out just saying I am wrong, I am happy to listen and learn. Because it you want to go the titan route. It was the start of replacing the 80 TI class. Way back when the top 110 dies (now 102 dies) fully unlocked was the 80 class card. It really started to show up with the GTX 680 when we got a GK104 instead of a 102 and kicked into high gear after the GTX 700s/kepler which is the gen Titan launched with. Point being Nvidia set the stage with the lesser GTX 680/ gk104 and excuted the move with the 700 series. And things have snowballed from there. When you use mm^2 we are getting less gpu per class than ever now.LordVile said:90 replaced the Titan not the 80 so your entire point is moot