Cheap and now even cheaper RTX 3050 – MSI Ventus 2X 8G OC

Ľubomír Samák

2 years ago

Metro Exodus

In addition to the global price drop on all graphics cards, MSI is now also reducing the MSRP of the RTX 3050 Ventus 2X (OC) from its lowest range. The phrase “affordable graphics card” thus takes on a new spin, and if you’ve read somewhere that the performance characteristics of Ventus graphics cards aren’t worth much, forget it. We certainly don’t see it that way, and few RTX 3050s for this money can boast a more functionally attractive design.

Before the release of the new Nvidia Lovelace and AMD RDNA 3 graphics cards, there’s at least one more matter from the current generation that we can’t leave out – the RTX 3050. This graphics card is profiled as a cheaper alternative to Radeons built on AMD Navi 23 GPUs (RX 6600 XT and RX 6600 XT). At the same time, the performance of the GeForce RTX 3050 is significantly higher than that of the Radeon RX 6500 XT (Navi 24), although it usually lags behind the RX 6600. Still, when combined with monitors with FHD resolution or applying DLSS, this is a card that still has decent gaming performance.

The GeForce RTX 3050 is based on the same silicon as the RTX 3060, but with fewer active CUDA cores/shaders (2560 instead of 3584), a third less video memory (8 GB GDDR6), and naturally a third less memory bus width (128 bits). The memory (at 14 Gbps) on the RTX 3050 is also a bit slower, and compared to the RTX 3060, the memory bandwidth is around 40 % lower. However, the clock speeds of the graphics core remain the same for the boost, 1777 MHz in the reference versions, a bit more in the overclocked variants. In the case of the MSI Ventus 2X 8G OC it is 1807 MHz, below which the clock speeds should not fall even under the highest load. In practice, however, they’re usually rather a bit higher, as you’ll also learn from our measurements.

MSI RTX 3050 Ventus 2X 8G OC in detail

For the test, we chose the RTX 3050 in a relatively inexpensive design. In the second cheapest (after the variant without OC, copying the reference parameters) variant that MSI has on offer. Ventus is hierarchically above the Armor range, but that doesn’t apply to Ampere graphics cards. MSI last used it on GeForce in the Nvidia Pascal generation, and so by design the Ventus 2X is the cheapest thing MSI has with the latest GeForce, unless it’s just an Aero ITX suitable for mini PCs. For mainstream cases, the RTX 3050 Ventus 2X 8G (OC) is the lower price point, but it’s definitely not a card that oozes significant frugality.

For the Ventus series, MSI uses the previous generation coolers that were on the more expensive Gaming (X) cards. This is also the case here with the Twin Frozr 7 cooler, which was also part of the RTX 2060 Super, for example, with a TDP of up to 175 W, 35 % higher than that of the RTX 3050 (130 W). Although it’s not a completely identical design and the finning is both a centimeter shorter and lower, the number of heatpipes (4) has remained and the total area of the fins hasn’t been reduced that much again. The fans (Torx 3.0) are the same as on all Twin Frozr 7 coolers, with a rotor diameter of 95 mm and a depth of 10 mm. The blades are fairly dense, with no significant gaps, so static pressure will be high and airflow loss across the fins relatively low.

Note also that there are two different blade shapes alternating in the rotor. One type has protrusions on the exhaust side to suppress unwanted microturbulence and also air slippage to the blade tips. The other type is again curved in the middle with a smaller angle in the first half, closer to the frame. MSI claims that these blades are meant to accelerate airflow. We can’t get more information and details on why the flow acceleration is supposed to happen from the available materials, but it’s probably for higher rigidity (with less elasticity) due to that center hump.

The cooler cover, unlike those on the RTX 2000 Gaming X, no longer has illuminated elements, and the backplate has been saved on, as it is no longer made of metal, but only plastic. However, thanks to the imitation of brushed aluminium, it doesn’t look cheap. The backplate then has the typical windows, as on most graphics cards, which have a shorter PCB than the cooler. This naturally makes for better air circulation for more efficient cooling. Otherwise, heated air would accumulate under the backplate and would still make the operation noisier due to more air resistance. This is therefore a good move.

The dimensions are also pleasing, being a good compromise between compatibility with surrounding components and the space a 130-watt card needs to achieve silent cooling. With a length of 235 mm it won’t have difficulties inside most cases (even in older ones, which still have the drive bays behind the front panel, in the axis of the PCI Express slots), in height the card fits nicely into two slots (so the third one can possibly hold some other card).

But the depth is already slightly above standard. The card does not end flush with the PCIe plug tab, but extends 20 mm beyond it. In cases with a traditional layout you won’t run into the side panel, but in atypical models with a vertically split interior, be wary. There could already be a collision with the side panel. In addition to the width of the graphics card itself, you also have to take into account the connector for external power supply. This is oriented towards the side panel and practically at the same level as the cover. This means that when you plug it in, you have to add ten millimeters of connector from the power supply plus something for the bend of the cable wires to the physical depth of the graphics card itself (124 mm).

On some graphics cards with typically slimmer PCBs, the cooler cover protrudes significantly beyond this connector or there is a cutout in the PCB for it. However, the RTX 3050 Ventus 2X 8G OC does not have any of these and when installing it, you need to take into account that you will need at least 140mm from the slot to the side of the case.

Over the past few days, MSI has reduced the recommended price of the RTX 3050 Ventus 2X 8G OC from the original 399 EUR to 369 EUR, making this card one of the cheapest RTX 3050 dual-fan variants.


Parameters		MSI RTX 3050 Ventus 2X 8G OC

Architecture		Ampere
Die		GA106 (LHR)
Manufacturing node		8 nm Samsung
Die size		276 mm²
Transistor count		12 bn.
Compute units		20 SM
Shaders/CUDA cores		2560
Base Clock		1552 MHz
Game Clock (AMD)		–
Boost Clock		1807 MHz
RT units		20
AI/tensor cores		80
ROPs		32
TMUs		80
L2 Cache		2 MB
Infinity Cache		–
Interface		PCIe 4.0 ×8
Multi-GPU interconnect		–
Memory		8 GB GDDR6
Memory clock (effective)		14,0 GHz
Memory bus		128 bitov
Memory bandwidth		224.0 GB/s
Pixel fillrate		57.8 Gpx/s
Texture fillrate		144.6 Gtx/s
FLOPS (FP32)		9.25 TFLOPS
FLOPS (FP64)		144.6 GFLOPS
FLOPS (FP16)		9.25 TFLOPS
AI/tensor TOPS (INT8)		72.8
AI/tensor FLOPS (FP16)		36.4
TDP		130 W
Power connectors		1× 8pin
Card lenght		235 mm
Card slots used		42 mm
Shader Model		6.5
DirectX/Feature Level		DX 12 Ultimate (12_2)
OpenGL		4.6
Vulkan		1.2
OpenCL		2.0
CUDA		8.6
Video encoder engine		NVEnc 7
Encoding formats		HEVC, H.264
Encoding resolution		8K
Video decoder engine		NVDec 5
Decoding formats		HEVC,H.264,VP9, AV1
Decoding resolution		8K
Max. Monitor resolution		7680 × 4320 px
HDMI		1× (2.1)
DisplayPort		3× (1.4a)
USB-C		–
MSRP		369 EUR

/* Here you can add custom CSS for the current table */ /* Lean more about CSS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascading_Style_Sheets */ /* To prevent the use of styles to other tables use "#supsystic-table-1792" as a base selector for example: #supsystic-table-1792 { ... } #supsystic-table-1792 tbody { ... } #supsystic-table-1792 tbody tr { ... } */

Gaming tests

The largest sample of tests is from games. This is quite natural given that GeForce and Radeons, i.e. cards primarily intended for gaming use, will mostly be tested.

We chose the test games primarily to ensure the balance between the titles better optimized for the GPU of one manufacturer (AMD) or the other one (Nvidia). But we also took into account the popularity of the titles so that you could find your own results in the charts. Emphasis was also placed on genre diversity. Games such as RTS, FPS, TPS, car racing as well as a flight simulator, traditional RPG and sports games are represented by the most played football game. You can find a list of test games in the library of chapters (9–32), with each game having its own chapter, sometimes even two (chapters) for the best possible clarity, but this has its good reason, which we will share with you in the following text.

Before we start the gaming tests, each graphics card will pass the tests in 3D Mark to warm up to operating temperature. That’s good synthetics to start with.

We’re testing performance in games across three resolutions with an aspect ratio of 16:9 – FHD (1920 × 1080 px), QHD (2560 × 1440 px) and UHD (3840 × 2160 px) and always with the highest graphic settings, which can be set the same on all current GeForce and Radeon graphics cards. We turned off proprietary settings for the objectivity of the conclusions, and the settings with ray-tracing graphics are tested separately, as lower class GPUs do not support them. You will find their results in the complementary chapters. In addition to native ray-tracing, also after deploying Nvidia DLSS (2.0) and AMD FidelityFX CAS.

If the game has a built-in benchmark, we use that one (the only exception is Forza Horizon 4, where due to its instability – it used to crash here and there – we drive on our track), in other cases the measurements take place on the games’ own scenes. From those we capture the times of consecutive frames in tables (CSV) via OCAT, which FLAT interprets into intelligible fps speech. Both of these applications are from the workshop of colleagues from the gpureport.cz magazine. In addition to the average frame rate, we also write the minimum in the graphs. That contributes significantly to the overall gaming experience. For the highest possible accuracy, all measurements are repeated three times and the final results form their average value.

Computational tests

Testing the graphics card comprehensively, even in terms of computing power, is more difficult than drawing conclusions from the gaming environment. Just because such tests are usually associated with expensive software that you don’t just buy for the editorial office. On the other hand, we’ve found ways to bring the available computing performance to you. On the one hand, thanks to well-built benchmarks, there are also some freely available and at the same time relevant applications, and thirdly, we have invested something in the paid ones.

The tests begin with ComputeBench, which computes various simulations (including game graphics). Then we move on to the popular SPECviewperf benchmark (2020), which integrates partial operations from popular 2D and 3D applications, including 3Ds max and SolidWorks. Details on this test package can be found at spec.org. From the same team also comes SPECworkstation 3, where GPU acceleration is in the Caffe and Folding@Home tests. You can also find the results of the LuxMark 3.1 3D render in the graphs, and the remarkable GPGPU theoretical test also includes AIDA64 with FLOPS, IOPS and memory speed measurements.

For obvious reasons, 3D rendering makes the largest portion of the tests. This is also the case, for example, in the Blender practical tests (2.91). In addition to Cycles, we will also test the cards in Eevee and radeon ProRender renderers (let AMD have a related test, as most are optimized for Nvidia cards with proprietary CUDA and OptiX frameworks). Of course, an add-on for V-ray would also be interesting, but at the moment the editorial office can’t afford it, we may manage to get a “press” license in time, though, we’ll see. We want to expand application tests in the future. Definitely with some advanced AI testing (we haven’t come up with a reasonable way yet), including noise reduction (there would be some ideas already, but we haven’t incorporated those due to time constraints).

Graphics cards can also be tested well in photo editing. To get an idea of the performance in the popular Photoshop, we’re using a script in PugetBench, which simulates real work with various filters. Among them are those that use GPU acceleration. A comprehensive benchmark suggesting the performance of raster and vector graphics is then also used in alternative Affinity Photo. In Lightroom, there are remarkable color corrections (Enhance Details) of raw uncompressed photos. We apply these in batches to a 1 GB archive. All of these tasks can be accelerated by both GeForce and Radeon.

From another perspective, there are decryption tests in Hashcat with a selection of AES, MD5, NTLMv2, SHA1, SHA2-256/512 and WPA-EAPOL-PBKDF2 ciphers. Finally, in the OBS and XSplit broadcast applications, we measure how much the game performance will be reduced while recording. It is no longer provided by shaders, but by coders (AMD VCE and Nvidia Nvenc). These tests show how much spare performance each card has for typical online streaming.

There are, of course, more hardware acceleration options, typically for video editing and conversion. However, this is purely in the hands of encoders, which are always the same within one generation of cards from one manufacturer, so there is no point in testing them on every graphics card. It is different across generations and tests of this type will sooner or later appear. Just fine-tuning the metric is left, where the output will always have the same bitrate and pixel match. This is important for objective comparisons, because the encoder of one company/card may be faster in a particular profile with the same settings, but at the expense of the lower quality that another encoder has (but may not have, it’s just an example).

Methodology: how we measure power draw

We have been tuning the method of measuring power draw for quite a long time and we will also be tuning it for some time. But we already have gimmicks that we can work with happily.

To get the exact value of the total power draw of the graphics card, it is necessary to map the internal power draw on the PCI Express slot and the external one on the additional power supply. For the analysis of the PCIe slot, it was necessary to construct an in-between card on which the power draw measurement takes place. Its basis is resistors calibrated to the exact value (0.1 Ω) and according to the amount of their voltage drop we can calculate the current. We then substitute it into the formula for the corresponding value of the output voltage ~ 12 V and ~ 3.3 V. The voltage drop is so low that it doesn’t make the VRM of the graphics card unstable and the output is still more than 12/3.3 V.

We measure power consumption on the card between the graphics card and the PCI Express slot. Rado Kopera took care of the design and implementation (thank you!)

We are also working on a similar device for external power supply. However, significantly higher currents are achieved there, longer cabling and more passages between connectors are necessary, which means that the voltage drop will have to be read on an even smaller resistance of 0.01 Ω, the current state (with 0.1 Ω) is unstable for now. Until we fine-tune it, we will use Prova 15 current clamp for cable measurements, which also measures with good accuracy, they just have a range of up to 30 A. But that is also enough for the OC version of the RTX 3090 Gaming X Trio. If a card is over the range, it is always possible to split the consumption measurement (first into one half and then into the other half of the 12 V conductors).

And why bother with such devices at all when Nvidia has a PCAT power draw analyzer? For complete control over the measurements. While our devices are transparent, the Nvidia’s tool uses the processor that can (but of course does not have to) affect the measurements. After testing the AMD graphics card on the Nvidia’s tool, we probably wouldn’t sleep well.

To read and record measurements, we use a properly calibrated multimeter Keysight U1231A, which exports samples to XLS. From it we obtain the average value and by substituting into the formula with the exact value of the subcircuit output voltages we obtain the data for the graphs.

We will analyze the line graphs with the waveforms for each part of the power supply separately. Although the 3.3 V value is usually negligible, it needs to be monitored. It is difficult to say what exactly this subcircuit powers, but usually the consumption on it is constant and when it changes only with regard to whether a static or dynamic image is rendered. We measure consumption in two sort of demanding games (F1 2020 and Shadow of the Tomb Raider) and one less demanding one (CS:GO) with the highest graphic details preset and UHD resolution (3840 × 2560 px). Then in 3D rendering in Blender using the Cycles renderer on the famous Classroom scene. However, in addition to high-load tests, it’s important to know your web browser consumption (which, in our case, is accelerated Google Chrome), where we also spend a lot of time watching videos or browsing the web. The usual average load of this type is represented by the FishIE Tank (HTML5) website with 20 fish and the web video in our power draw tests is represented by a sample with the VP9 codec, data rate of 17.4 mb/s and 60 fps. In contrast, we also test offline video consumption, in VLC player on a 45 HEVC sample (45.7 mb/s, 50 fps). Finally, we also record the power consumption of the graphics card on the desktop of idle Windows 10 with one or two active UHD@60 Hz monitors.

Noise measurement.

Noise, as well as other operating characteristics, which we will focus on, we’re measuring in the same modes as consumption, so that the individual values overlap nicely. In addition to the level of noise produced, we also record the frequency response of the sound, the course of the GPU clock speed and its temperature.

In this part of the methodology description, we will present something about the method of noise measurement. We use a Reed R8080 sound level meter, which we continuously calibrate with a calibrated Voltcraft SLC-100 digital sound level meter. A small addition to the sound level meter is a parabola-shaped collar, which has two functions. Increases the sensitivity to distinguish the sound produced even at very low speeds. It is thus possible to better compare even very quiet cards with the largest possible ratio difference. Otherwise (without this adjustment) it could simply happen that we measured the same noise level across several graphics cards, even though it would actually be a little different. This parabolic shield also makes sense because, from the outer convex side (from the back), it reflects all the parasitic sounds that everyone who really aims for accuracy of the measurements struggles with during the test. These are various cracks of the body or objects in the room during normal human activity.

To ensure the same conditions when measuring the noise level (and later also the sound), we use acoustic panels with a foam surface around the bench-wall. This is so that the sound is always reflected to the sound level meter sensor in the same way, regardless of the current situation of the objects in the test room. These panels are from three sides (top, right and left) and their purpose is to soundproof the space in which we measure the noise of graphics cards. Soundproofing means preventing different reflections of sound and oscillations of waves between flat walls. Don’t confuse it with sound-absorbing, we’ve had that solved well in the test lab for a long time.

During the measurements, the sound level meter sensor is always placed on a tripod at the same angle and at the same distance (35 cm) from the PCI Express slot in which the graphics card is installed. Of course, it’s always closer to the card itself, depending on its depth. The indicated reference point and the sensor angles are fixed. In addition to the “aerodynamic noise” of the coolers, we also measure the noise level of whining coils. Then we stop the fans for a moment. And for the sake of completeness, it should be added that during sound measurements, we also switch off the power supply fan as well as the CPU cooler fan. Thus, purely the graphics card is always measured without any distortion by other components.

… and the sound frequency response

From the same place, we also measure the frequency of the sound produced. One thing is the noise level (or sound pressure level in decibels) and the other thing is its frequency response.

According to the data on the noise level, you can quickly find out whether the graphics card is quieter or noisier, or where it is on the scale, but it is still a mix of different frequencies. Thus, it does not say whether the sound produced is more booming (with a lower frequency) or squeaking (with a high frequency). The same 35 dBA can be pleasant but also unpleasant for you under certain circumstances – it depends on each individual how they perceive different frequencies. For this reason, we will also measure the frequency response of the sound graphics card in addition to the noise level, via the TrueRTA application. The results will be interpreted in the form of a spectrograph with a resolution of 1/24 octave and for better comparison with other graphics cards we will include the dominant frequency of lower (20–200 Hz), medium (201–2,000 Hz) and higher (2,001–20,000 Hz) sound spectrum into standard bar graphs. For measurements, we’re using a calibrated miniDSP UMIK-1 microphone, which accurately copies the position of the sound level meter, but also has a collar, even with the same focal length.

At the end of this chapter, it should be noted that measurements of noise and frequency response of sound will be performed on most cards only in load tests, as out of load and at lower load (including video decoding) operation is usually passive with fans turned off. On the other hand, we must also be prepared for exceptions with active operation in idle or graphics cards with dual BIOS setup, from which the more powerful one never turns off the fans and they run at least at minimum speed. Finally, as with measuring the noise level in one of the tests, we also record the frequency response of whining coils. But don’t expect any dramatic differences here. It will usually be one frequency, and the goal is rather to detect any potential anomalies. The sound of the whining coils is of course variable, depending on the scene, but we always measure in the same scene (in CS:GO@1080p).

Methodology: temperature tests

We’re also bringing you temperature tests. You are at HWCooling after all. However, in order to make it sensible at all to monitor temperatures on critical components not only of the graphics card, but anything in the computer, it is important to simulate a real computer case environment with healthy air circulation. The overall behavior of the graphics card as such then follows from this. In many cases, an open bench-table is inappropriate and results can be distorted. Therefore, during all, not only heat tests, but also measurement of consumption or course of graphics core frequencies, we use a wind tunnel with equilibrium flow.

Two Noctua NF-S12A fans are at the inlet and the same number is on the exhaust. When testing various system cooling configurations, this proved to be the most effective solution. The fans are always set to 5 V and the speed corresponds to approx. 550 rpm. The stability of the inlet air is properly controlled during the tests, the temperature being between 21 and 21.3 °C at a humidity of ±40 %.

We read the temperature from the internal sensors via GPU-Z. This small, single-purpose application also allows you to record samples from sensors in a table. From the table, it is then easy to create line graphs with waveforms or the average value into bar graphs. We will not use the thermal camera very much here, as most graphics cards have a backplate, which makes it impossible to measure the PCB heating. The key for the heating graphs will be the temperature reading by internal sensors, according to which, after all, the GPU frequency control also takes place. It will always be the heating of the graphics core, and if the sensors are also on VRAM and VRM, we will extract these values into the article as well.

Test rig

The Patriot Blackout memory (4× 8 GB, 3600 MHz/CL18)

2× SSD Patriot Viper VPN100 (512 GB + 2 TB)

The BeQuiet! Dark Power Pro 12 PSU w/ 1200 W


Test configuration
Processor	AMD Ryzen 9 5900X
CPU Cooler	Noctua NH-U14S@12 V s NT-H2
Motherboard	MSI MEG X570 Ace
Memory (RAM)	Patriot Blackout, 4× 8 GB, 3600 MHz/CL18
SSD	2× Patriot Viper VPN100 (512 GB + 2 TB)
PSU	BeQuiet! Dark Power Pro 12 (1200 W)

/* Here you can add custom CSS for the current table */ /* Lean more about CSS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascading_Style_Sheets */ /* To prevent the use of styles to other tables use "#supsystic-table-979" as a base selector for example: #supsystic-table-979 { ... } #supsystic-table-979 tbody { ... } #supsystic-table-979 tbody tr { ... } */

Note: Nvidia GeForce 516.94 Game Ready and 516.94 Studio graphics drivers are used at the time of testing, Windows 10 Enterprise OS build is 19042.

3DMark

For the tests we’re using 3DMark Professional and the Night Raid (DirectX12) is suitable for comparing weaker GPUs, for more powerful ones there is Fire Strike (DirectX11) and Time Spy (DirectX12).

Age of Empires II: DE

Test platform benchmark, API DirectX 11; graphics settings preset Ultra; no extra settings.

Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla

Test platform benchmark; API DirectX 12; graphics settings preset Ultra High; no extra settings.

Battlefield V

est platform custom scene (War stories/Under no flag); API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Ultra; TAA high; no extra settings.

Battlefield V with DXR

Test platform custom scene (War stories/Under no flag); API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Ultra; TAA high; extra settings DXR.

The game also supports DLSS, but as it’s an older title and there are many tests, we will not address it in standard tests. However, measurements on request are possible if you ask for it.

Borderlands 3

Testovacia platforma benchmark; API DirectX 12, prednastavený grafický profil Ultra; TAA; extra nastavenia žiadne.

Control

Test platform custom scene (chapter Polaris); API DirectX 11, graphics settings preset High; no extra settings.

Control with DXR and DLSS

Test platform custom scene (chapter Polaris); API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset High; extra settings DXR.

DXR (native)

DXR with DLSS (performance)

Counter-Strike: GO

Test platform benchmark (Dust 2 map tour); API DirectX 9, graphics settings preset High; 4× MSAA; no extra settings.

Cyberpunk 2077

Test platform custom scene (Little China); API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Ultra; no extra settings.

Cyberpunk 2077 with DLSS

DLSS (performance)

Cyberpunk 2077 with DXR

Test platform custom scene (Little China); API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Ultra; extra settings Ray Tracing on (Ultra).

DXR

DXR s DLSS (performance)

DOOM Eternal

Test platform custom scene; API Vulkan, graphics settings preset Ultra Nightmare; no extra settings.

F1 2020

Test platform benchmark (Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle); API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Ultra High; TAA; extra settings Skidmarks blending off*.

*on GeForce graphics cards, the Skidmarks blending option is disabled. This option is missing on AMD graphics cards. However, the overall quality of Skidmarks is otherwise set to High on both GeForce and AMD.

Note: The game also supports DLSS 2.0 and FidelityFX for upscaling and sharpening, but due to the relatively low hardware requirements in the native settings, we will not address them in standard tests. However, measurements on request are possible if you ask for it.

FIFA 21

Test platform custom scene (Autumn/Fall, Overcast, 9pm, Old Trafford); API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Ultra; no extra settings.

Forza Horizon 4

Test platform custom scene; API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Ultra; 2× MSAA; no extra settings.

Mafia: DE

Test platform custom scene (from the Salieri’s Bar parking lot to the elevated railway gate); API DirectX 11, graphics settings preset High; no extra settings.

Metro Exodus

Test platform benchmark; API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Extreme; no extra settings..

Metro Exodus with DXR and DLSS

Test platform benchmark; API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Ultra; extra settings DXR.

DXR (native)

DXR s DLSS (performance)

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Disclaimer: We do not use the results from this game to calculate the average gaming performance. This is because the performance of the game often changes due to updates, and when this happens, we start building the results database from scratch. To check the consistency of the MFS results, we run a test scene with the MSI RTX 3080 Gaming X Trio before testing each new graphics card.

Test platform custom scene (Paris-Charles de Gaulle, Air Traffic: AI, February 14, 9:00 am) autopilot: from 1000 until hitting the terrain; API DirectX 11, graphics settings preset Ultra; TAA; no extra settings.

Red Dead Redemption 2 (Vulkan)

Test platform custom scene; API Vulkan, graphics settings preset Favor Quality; no extra settings.

Red Dead Redemption 2 (Dx12)

Test platform custom scene; API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Favor Quality; no extra settings.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider

Test platform custom scene; API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Highest; TAA; no extra settings.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider s DXR

Test platform benchmark; API DirectX 12, graphics settings preset Highest; extra settings DXR.

Note: This game also supports DLSS and FidelityFX CAS, but since this is an older title and there are more than enough tests, we will not address this setting in standard tests. However, testing on request is possible if you ask for it.

Total War Saga: Troy

Test platform benchmark; API DirectX 11, graphics settings preset Ultra; 4× AA, no extra settings.

Wasteland 3

Test platform custom scene; API DirectX 11, graphics settings preset Ultra; no extra settings.

Overall game performance

We calculate the average performance so that each game has an equal weight on the result. You can find out exactly how we arrive at the result in this article.

Performance per euro

CompuBench 2.0 (OpenCL)

Test platform benchmark; API OpenCL; no extra settings.

Game Effects

Advanced Compute

High Quality Computer Generated Imagery and Rendering

Computer Vision

SPECviewperf 2020

Test platform benchmark; API OpenGL and DirectX; no extra settings.

SPECworkstation 3

FLOPS, IOPS and memory speed tests

Test platform benchmark; app version 6.32.5600; no extra settings.

LuxMark

Test platform benchmark; API OpenCL; no extra settings.

Blender@Cycles

Test platform render BMW and Classroom; renderer Cycles, 12 tiles; extra settings: OpenCL for Radeon and CUDA for GeForce, the way most people will use it. OpenCL with GeForce is always slow because path tracing does not support GPU acceleration and is calculated by the CPU. Nvidia OptiX is tested separately on supported cards (GeForce RTX) and the results are drawn separately.

We also test Nvidia OptiX on GeForce RTX

Blender@Radeon ProRender

Test platform render BMW and Classroom; renderer Radeon ProRender, 1024 samples. Extra settings are OpenCL for Radeon and CUDA for GeForce. Nvidia OptiX is tested separately on supported graphics cards (GeForce RTX) and the results are drawn separately.

Blender@Eevee

Test platform animation render Ember Forest; renderer Eevee, 350 images; extra settings OpenCL.

Photo editing

Adobe Photoshop: Test platform PugetBench; no extra settings.

Affinity Photo: Test platform built-in benchmark; no extra settings.

Adobe Lightroom: Test platform custom1-gigabyte archive of 42 raw photos (CR2) taken with DSLR; no extra settings.

Broadcasting

OBS Studio and XSplit: Test platform F1 2020 game benchmark; extra settings – enabled encoders AMD VCE/Nvidia Nvenc (AVC/H.264), output resolution 2560 × 1440 px (60 fps), target bitrate 19,700 kbps.

Password cracking

Test platform Hashcat; no extra settings. You can easily try the tests yourself. Just download the binary and enter the cipher you are interested in using in the command line according to the numeric code.

Why are some GeForce graphics cards reporting no results? Nvidia’s newer 5xx.xx game and studio drivers no longer support Hashcat. Although it can be started via the command line and a test for a specific cipher can be entered, but no action, calculation, comes after confirmation. We will investigate the reasons and possible solutions in more detail over time, but without a fix at the graphics driver level, it’s probably not going to happen.

GPU clock speeds

GPU temperature

VRAM temperature

Note: If the measured value is missing for the selected graphics card, it means that it cannot be detected by the internal sensor.

Net GPU power draw

Performance per watt

Analysis of 12 V branch power supply (higher load)

Analysis of 12 V branch power supply (lower load)

Analysis of 3,3 V branch power supply

Noise level

Frequency response of sound

Measurements are performed in the TrueRTA application, which records sound in a range of 240 frequencies in the recorded range of 20–20,000 Hz. For the possibility of comparison across articles, we export the dominant frequency from the low (20–200 Hz), medium (201–2,000 Hz) and high (2,001–20,000 Hz) range to standard bar graphs.

However, for an even more detailed analysis of the sound expression, it is important to perceive the overall shape of the graph and the intensity of all frequencies/tones. If you don’t understand something in the graphs or tables below, you’ll find the answers to all your questions in this article. This explains how to read the measured data below correctly.

The microphone we use to analyze the sound of coolers and coils


Graphics card		Dominant sound freq. and noise level in F1 2020@2160p	NF-F12 PWM		NF-A15 PWM
		Low range		Mid range		High range
		Frequency [Hz]	Noise level [dBu]	Frequency [Hz]	Noise level [dBu]	Frequency [Hz]	Noise level [dBu]
MSI RTX 3050 Ventus 2X 8G OC, ReBAR off		138,5	-78,8	1107,9	-78,6	2031,9	-84,8
MSI RTX 3050 Ventus 2X 8G OC, ReBAR on		123,4	-81,2	1107,9	-80,0	18245,6	-83,7
Sapphire RX 6650 XT Nitro+ (P), ReBAR on		50,4	-83,3	1107,9	-72,4	7240,8	-82,5
Sapphire RX 6650 XT Nitro+ (P), ReBAR off		184,9	-82,3	1107,9	-71,4	6834,4	-82,2
Sapphire RX 6600 XT Pulse, ReBAR on	Sapphire RX 6600 XT Pulse, ReBAR on	100,8	-71,8	1356,1	-72,7	6088,7	-80,9
Sapphire RX 6600 XT Pulse, ReBAR off	Sapphire RX 6600 XT Pulse, ReBAR off	100,8	-71,8	219,8	-74,5	6088,7	-81,0
Aorus RTX 3080 Xtreme 10G (OC), ReBAR on		50,4	-77,0	1076,3	-56,5	2031,9	-69,4
Aorus RTX 3080 Xtreme 10G (OC), ReBAR off		50,4	-75,9	1076,3	-56,7	2031,9	-69,6
Sapphire RX 6900 XT Toxic LE (P), ReBAR on	Sapphire RX 6900 XT Toxic LE (P), ReBAR on	138,5	-62,4	1107,9	-56,6	11166,8	-74,7
Sapphire RX 6900 XT Toxic LE (P), ReBAR off	Sapphire RX 6900 XT Toxic LE (P), ReBAR on	138,5	-61,9	1107,9	-55,6	5747,0	-74,7
Sapphire RX 6700 XT Nitro+ (P), ReBAR on		100,8	-73,2	1076,3	-71,2	7034,6	-76,5
Sapphire RX 6700 XT Nitro+ (P), ReBAR off		100,8	-75,2	1076,3	-73,5	7034,6	-76,5
MSI RTX 3060 Ti Gaming X Trio, ReBAR off		100,8	-70,6	1107,9	-82,8	7034,6	-83,7
Gigabyte RTX 3060 Eagle OC 12G, ReBAR off		100,8	-71,6	213,6	-64,3	2031,9	-74,2
MSI RTX 3090 Gaming X Trio, ReBAR off		100,8	-72,3	1076,3	-76,0	4561,4	-81,2
MSI RTX 3070 Gaming X Trio, ReBAR off		100,8	-73,9	1076,3	-79,7	6267,2	-85,1
AMD Radeon RX 6800, ReBAR on		100,8	-71,0	1076,3	-66,5	9665,3	-81,3
AMD Radeon RX 6800, ReBAR off		100,8	-71,8	1107,9	-67,4	2091,4	-75,3
TUF RTX 3080 O10G Gaming, ReBAR off		100,8	-76,0	1107,9	-77,9	7034,6	-74,4
AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT, ReBAR on		100,8	-71,6	1107,9	-74,7	10848,9	-76,3
AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT, ReBAR off		100,8	-73,0	1107,9	-74,7	10848,9	-76,5

/* Here you can add custom CSS for the current table */ /* Lean more about CSS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascading_Style_Sheets */ /* To prevent the use of styles to other tables use "#supsystic-table-1780" as a base selector for example: #supsystic-table-1780 { ... } #supsystic-table-1780 tbody { ... } #supsystic-table-1780 tbody tr { ... } */


Graphics card		Dominant sound freq. and noise level in SOTTR@2160p	NF-F12 PWM		NF-A15 PWM
		Low range		Mid range		High range
		Frequency [Hz]	Noise level [dBu]	Frequency [Hz]	Noise level [dBu]	Frequency [Hz]	Noise level [dBu]
MSI RTX 3050 Ventus 2X 8G OC, ReBAR off		138,5	-78,4	1140,4	-78,5	2031,9	-84,7
MSI RTX 3050 Ventus 2X 8G OC, ReBAR on		138,5	-78,3	1107,9	-78,4	2031,9	-84,6
Sapphire RX 6650 XT Nitro+ (P), ReBAR on		50,4	-80,1	1107,9	-76,5	6834,4	-84,3
Sapphire RX 6650 XT Nitro+ (P), ReBAR off		47,6	-84,3	1107,9	-75,9	6834,4	-82,8
Sapphire RX 6600 XT Pulse, ReBAR on		100,8	-68,8	1356,1	-75,7	6088,7	-82,6
Sapphire RX 6600 XT Pulse, ReBAR off		100,8	-69,5	1356,1	-74,8	5915,4	-83,1
Aorus RTX 3080 Xtreme 10G (OC), ReBAR on		44,9	-73,0	1045,7	-50,3	2031,9	-60,5
Aorus RTX 3080 Xtreme 10G (OC), ReBAR off		41,8	-72,6	1076,3	-51,4	2031,9	-60,7
Sapphire RX 6900 XT Toxic LE (P), ReBAR on	Sapphire RX 6900 XT Toxic LE (P), ReBAR on	138,5	-63,1	1140,4	-57,9	5747,0	-74,7
Sapphire RX 6900 XT Toxic LE (P), ReBAR off	Sapphire RX 6900 XT Toxic LE (P), ReBAR off	134,5	-61,7	1107,9	-58,6	5747,0	-74,2
Sapphire RX 6700 XT Nitro+ (P), ReBAR on		100,8	-73,9	1140,4	-75,4	5915,4	-77,2
Sapphire RX 6700 XT Nitro+ (P), ReBAR off		100,8	-75,1	1107,9	-75,2	5915,4	-76,5
MSI RTX 3060 Ti Gaming X Trio, ReBAR off		100,8	-70,8	1076,3	-83,6	7034,6	-81,9
Gigabyte RTX 3060 Eagle OC 12G, ReBAR off		100,8	-71,9	213,6	-64,5	2031,9	-73,8
MSI RTX 3090 Gaming X Trio, ReBAR off		106,8	-74,5	213,6	-71,3	4561,4	-79,3
MSI RTX 3070 Gaming X Trio, ReBAR off		100,8	-73,0	213,6	-72,3	6267,2	-84,9
AMD Radeon RX 6800, ReBAR on		100,8	-71,8	1140,4	-66,1	9948,5	-81,3
AMD Radeon RX 6800, ReBAR off		100,8	-71,6	1140,4	-67,8	9665,3	-80,6
TUF RTX 3080 O10G Gaming, ReBAR off		100,8	-75,4	1076,3	-72,3	7240,8	-74,2
AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT, ReBAR on		100,8	-73,2	1107,9	-73,9	10848,9	-76,3
AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT, ReBAR off		100,8	-73,2	1107,9	-75,3	10848,9	-75,4

/* Here you can add custom CSS for the current table */ /* Lean more about CSS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascading_Style_Sheets */ /* To prevent the use of styles to other tables use "#supsystic-table-1781" as a base selector for example: #supsystic-table-1781 { ... } #supsystic-table-1781 tbody { ... } #supsystic-table-1781 tbody tr { ... } */


Graphics card		Dominant sound freq. and noise level in CS:GO@2160p	NF-F12 PWM		NF-A15 PWM
		Low range		Mid range		High range
		Frequency [Hz]	Noise level [dBu]	Frequency [Hz]	Noise level [-dBu]	Frequency [Hz]	Noise level [-dBu]
MSI RTX 3050 Ventus 2X 8G OC, ReBAR off		138,5	-79,8	1107,9	-77,6	2031,9	-83,4
MSI RTX 3050 Ventus 2X 8G OC, ReBAR on		123,4	-81,0	1107,9	-77,8	2031,9	-83,6
Sapphire RX 6650 XT Nitro+ (P), ReBAR on		50,4	-79,6	1107,9	-74,2	7240,8	-80,8
Sapphire RX 6650 XT Nitro+ (P), ReBAR off		49,0	-84,3	1107,9	-80,0	6834,4	-80,2
Sapphire RX 6600 XT Pulse, ReBAR on		100,8	-68,7	1356,1	-74,7	6088,7	-80,8
Sapphire RX 6600 XT Pulse, ReBAR off		100,8	-69,3	1356,1	-75,1	6088,7	-79,2
Aorus RTX 3080 Xtreme 10G (OC), ReBAR on		47,6	-67,1	1045,7	-49,6	2031,9	-60,1
Aorus RTX 3080 Xtreme 10G (OC), ReBAR off		47,6	-70,3	1140,4	-50,8	2031,9	-60,2
Sapphire RX 6900 XT Toxic LE (P), ReBAR on	Sapphire RX 6900 XT Toxic LE (P), ReBAR on	138,5	-64,1	1107,9	-60,1	8610,8	-70,9
Sapphire RX 6900 XT Toxic LE (P), ReBAR off	Sapphire RX 6900 XT Toxic LE (P), ReBAR off	134,5	-71,6	1107,9	-66,4	8365,6	-72,1
Sapphire RX 6700 XT Nitro+ (P), ReBAR on		100,8	-72,6	1173,8	-74,9	5915,4	-74,6
Sapphire RX 6700 XT Nitro+ (P), ReBAR off		100,8	-75,0	1107,9	-73,8	5747,0	-74,2
MSI RTX 3060 Ti Gaming X Trio, ReBAR off		100,8	-71,4	1107,9	-83,1	6267,2	-82,5
Gigabyte RTX 3060 Eagle OC 12G, ReBAR off		100,8	-72,6	213,6	-64,8	2031,9	-73,8
MSI RTX 3090 Gaming X Trio, ReBAR off		106,8	-75,7	213,6	-73,4	4695,1	-77,6
MSI RTX 3070 Gaming X Trio, ReBAR off		106,8	-75,7	213,6	-73,4	6267,2	-82,7
AMD Radeon RX 6800, ReBAR on		100,8	-71,2	1107,9	-66,2	9948,5	-77,4
AMD Radeon RX 6800, ReBAR off		100,8	-71,1	1076,3	-77,3	9665,3	-77,7
TUF RTX 3080 O10G Gaming, ReBAR off		100,8	-74,2	1076,3	-70,9	7240,8	-74,4
AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT, ReBAR on		100,8	-73,0	1107,9	-74,3	7671,3	-72,4
AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT, ReBAR off		100,8	-72,3	1107,9	-73,7	10848,9	-72,5

/* Here you can add custom CSS for the current table */ /* Lean more about CSS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascading_Style_Sheets */ /* To prevent the use of styles to other tables use "#supsystic-table-1786" as a base selector for example: #supsystic-table-1786 { ... } #supsystic-table-1786 tbody { ... } #supsystic-table-1786 tbody tr { ... } */


Graphics card	Dominant sound freq. and noise level in Blender (Cycles), Classroom	NF-F12 PWM		NF-A15 PWM
	Low range		Mid range		High range
	Frequency [Hz]	Noise level [dBu]	Frequency [Hz]	Noise level [dBu]	Frequency [Hz]	Noise level [dBu]
MSI RTX 3050 Ventus 2X 8G OC, ReBAR off	123,4	-79,3	213,6	-81,4	18245,6	-85,5
MSI RTX 3050 Ventus 2X 8G OC, ReBAR on	123,4	-79,5	213,6	-81,5	18245,6	-85,6
Sapphire RX 6650 XT Nitro+ (P), ReBAR on	50,4	-77,9	1107,9	-83,5	7240,8	-87,3
Sapphire RX 6650 XT Nitro+ (P), ReBAR off	50,4	-79,1	1107,9	-83,9	7240,8	-87,5
Sapphire RX 6600 XT Pulse, ReBAR on	100,8	-70,1	1356,1	-73,4	5583,4	-86,1
Sapphire RX 6600 XT Pulse, ReBAR off	100,8	-69,8	1356,1	-73,7	5915,4	-86,0
Asus GT 1030 SL 2G BRK, ReBAR off	50,397	-71,7	1107,9	-94,9	19330,5	-90,5
Aorus RTX 3080 Xtreme 10G (OC), ReBAR on	50,4	-76,4	1107,9	-57,9	2031,9	-69,7
Aorus RTX 3080 Xtreme 10G (OC), ReBAR off	50,4	-78,7	1076,3	-60,9	5424,5	-74,0
Sapphire RX 6900 XT Toxic LE (P), ReBAR on	116,5	-65,0	1107,9	-68,5	5120,0	-77,3
Sapphire RX 6900 XT Toxic LE (P), ReBAR off	116,5	-65,1	1107,9	-68,4	5120,0	-77,1
Sapphire RX 6700 XT Nitro+ (P), ReBAR on	100,8	-72,6	1173,8	-86,6	5915,4	-82,4
Sapphire RX 6700 XT Nitro+ (P), ReBAR off	100,8	-75,8	1076,3	-87,2	5915,4	-82,1
MSI RTX 3060 Ti Gaming X Trio, ReBAR off	100,8	-70,4	987,0	-89,5	6450,8	-89,0
Gigabyte RTX 3060 Eagle OC 12G, ReBAR off	100,8	-72,6	213,6	-70,0	2031,9	-79,1
MSI RTX 3090 Gaming X Trio, ReBAR off	100,8	-71,2	1076,3	-85,3	5915,4	-92,0
MSI RTX 3070 Gaming X Trio, ReBAR off	100,8	-71,2	1076,3	-85,3	18245,6	-90,8
AMD Radeon RX 6800, ReBAR on	100,8	-71,9	987,0	-89,2	7452,9	-88,3
AMD Radeon RX 6800, ReBAR off	100,8	-71,1	987,0	-89,0	7452,9	-88,2
TUF RTX 3080 O10G Gaming, ReBAR off	106,8	-81,5	1660,0	-80,6	6834,4	-78,0
AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT, ReBAR on	97,9	-79,8	1208,2	-89,6	7671,3	-85,2
AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT, ReBAR off	100,8	-73,0	1243,6	-95,2	7671,3	-85,0

/* Here you can add custom CSS for the current table */ /* Lean more about CSS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascading_Style_Sheets */ /* To prevent the use of styles to other tables use "#supsystic-table-1787" as a base selector for example: #supsystic-table-1787 { ... } #supsystic-table-1787 tbody { ... } #supsystic-table-1787 tbody tr { ... } */


Graphics card		Dominant sound freq. and noise level in CS:GO@1080p (coils only*)	NF-F12 PWM		NF-A15 PWM
		Low range		Mid range		High range
		Frequency [Hz]	Noise level [dBu]	Frequency [Hz]	Noise level [dBu]	Frequency [Hz]	Noise level [dBu]
MSI RTX 3050 Ventus 2X 8G OC, ReBAR off		50,4	-83,6	1317,5	-83,0	7896,1	-83,9
MSI RTX 3050 Ventus 2X 8G OC, ReBAR on		50,4	-77,7	1317,5	-87,3	10848,9	-84,5
Sapphire RX 6650 XT Nitro+ (P), ReBAR on		50,4	-81,8	1045,7	-84,2	2091,4	-77,7
Sapphire RX 6650 XT Nitro+ (P), ReBAR off		50,4	-83,3	1974,0	-90,0	7034,6	-82,4
Sapphire RX 6600 XT Pulse, ReBAR on		100,8	-72,0	1107,9	-83,7	2215,8	-79,6
Sapphire RX 6600 XT Pulse, ReBAR off		100,8	-68,4	1917,8	-88,7	6450,8	-81,4
Asus GT 1030 SL 2G BRK, ReBAR off		50,4	-71,1	1107,9	-91,7	12534,3	-89,8
Aorus RTX 3080 Xtreme 10G (OC), ReBAR on		50,4	-80,6	1660,0	-80,3	7896,1	-80,2
Aorus RTX 3080 Xtreme 10G (OC), ReBAR off		50,4	-78,8	1660,0	-82,6	7671,3	-80,4
Sapphire RX 6900 XT Toxic LE (P), ReBAR on	Sapphire RX 6900 XT Toxic LE (P), ReBAR on	100,8	-74,9	739,4	-67,9	5915,4	-78,5
Sapphire RX 6900 XT Toxic LE (P), ReBAR off	Sapphire RX 6900 XT Toxic LE (P), ReBAR off	50,4	-81,4	739,4	-70,2	8610,8	-73,6
Sapphire RX 6700 XT Nitro+ (P), ReBAR on		100,8	-74,6	987,0	-84,8	5747,0	-69,6
Sapphire RX 6700 XT Nitro+ (P), ReBAR off		100,8	-74,7	1395,9	-88,4	5747,0	-70,3
MSI RTX 3060 Ti Gaming X Trio, ReBAR off		100,8	-73,0	1974,0	-88,1	6267,2	-83,6
Gigabyte RTX 3060 Eagle OC 12G, ReBAR off		100,8	-73,6	1974,0	-90,2	6088,7	-83,1
MSI RTX 3090 Gaming X Trio, ReBAR off		50,4	-76,1	987,0	-84,8	5915,4	-83,3
MSI RTX 3070 Gaming X Trio, ReBAR off		100,8	-74,7	1317,5	-81,4	6088,7	-84,6
AMD Radeon RX 6800, ReBAR on		100,8	-71,8	987,0	-87,7	7452,9	-80,4
AMD Radeon RX 6800, ReBAR off		100,8	-72,0	1660,0	-90,4	8863,1	-84,5
TUF RTX 3080 O10G Gaming, ReBAR off		100,8	-75,6	1140,4	-81,7	9948,5	-78,7
AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT, ReBAR on		100,8	-73,6	1660,0	-79,8	7452,9	-74,0
AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT, ReBAR off		100,8	-73,3	1660,0	-83,3	7452,9	-76,4

/* Here you can add custom CSS for the current table */ /* Lean more about CSS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascading_Style_Sheets */ /* To prevent the use of styles to other tables use "#supsystic-table-1788" as a base selector for example: #supsystic-table-1788 { ... } #supsystic-table-1788 tbody { ... } #supsystic-table-1788 tbody tr { ... } */

*With the Sapphire RX 6900 XT Toxic LE, as with the only tested graphics card, the spectral analysis also includes the sound of the water pump.

Conclusion

Compared to Radeon RX 6600 XT, RTX 3050’s performance across resolutions is 14–24 % lower (with the biggest difference being in the target Full HD resolution). The gap to the RX 6650 XT is naturally a little more significant, but the performance deficit is adequately reflected by the lower price of the RTX 3050. The performance of the cheapest GeForce GPU (i.e. the one in the RTX 3050) with hardware ray tracing support is optimal up to 1080p resolution, where it keeps fps stably above 60 in most games even at the highest graphics detail settings (except for ray tracing). That’s including Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla, Battlefield V, Control, Mafia: DE, Red Dead Redemption 2 or Shadow of the Tomb Raider.

There are even AAA games where the RTX 3050 has sufficient performance even at 1440p. The list includes DOOM Eternal, F1 2020, Forza Horizon 4 (and hopefully for the latest titles in these racing series…) or Wasteland 3. Less demanding games like CS:GO, FIFA or Age of Empires II: DE are nicely smooth even in Ultra HD (2160p). Anyway, there are also quite a lot of games that can be uncomfortable even in 1080p. That is, assuming you want to stay at high graphical detail and operate without DLSS. Rendering below 60 fps is to be expected in Borderlands 3, in Microsoft Flight Simulator, ale aj in Total War Saga: Troy or in Cyberpunk 2077. In these titles, reducing graphical details or, in the case of Cyberpunk 2077, applying DLSS is essential for a smoother experience. In performance mode (with 50 % scaling in each axis) the game runs stably around 70 fps.

We also looked at the effect of ReSizable BAR activity on performance. In majority of games (Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla, Borderlands 3, Control or Cyberpunk 2077, FIFA 21 and the like), it means 4–5 percent better performance. In Total War Saga: Troy and in Forza Horizon 4 it’s more, 10–11 %. Occasionally, however, there are also performance drops, for example in DOOM Eternal (-7 % at 1080p) or in application environment. Some filters in Photoshop (Fied/Iris Blur or Liquify) may be slower with ReBAR or the Eevee animation renderer in Blender.

Vector graphics in Affinity Photo (which didn’t used to be there) is a hair faster with ReBAR for a change and The drop in gaming fps with screen capture is lower with it as well (which is good), in practice, this is typically a streaming, AMD VCE encoder. The differences are always very small, but there are still some improvements. However, Nvidia’s newer drivers (including the studio ones) have lost Hashcat support, and therefore the RTX 3050 results are missing from the relevant chapter.
Hashcat is not supported by any drivers for RTX 3050, but it does not affect the (de)encryption in other applications. In them everything is fine.

The RTX 3050’s raw performance is admittedly lower than RX 66×0 XT, but outside of OpenCL it is typically a faster graphics card for 3D rendering. Specially when the OptiX API is supported. But even Blender with CUDA with the most widely used Cycles renderer is faster, and at the same time at clearly more favorable performance per watt.RTX 3050’s power efficiency is high overall, even in games – between the RX 6600 XT and RX 6650 XT. And the price/performance ratio is better than with these Radeons. Notably, however, the RTX 3050 Ventus 2X 8G OC graphics card performs at a similar and/or worse level than the RTX 3050 Eagle OC 12G. However, here we need to take into account the efficiency of the cooler, which is significantly higher with the RTX 3050 MSI and among the cheaper series is really excellent.

The cooler is noticeably quieter compared to that on the RTX 3060 Eagle OC 12G Eagle, and it doesn’t even drown out the Sapphire Pulse on the RX 6600 XT by a long shot. Yes, they’re both more powerful graphics cards, but the increase in their power draw (over the RTX 3050 Ventus 2X 8G OC) doesn’t correspond in either case to the increase in noise. The lower noise level is not at the expense of higher temperature. Temperatures are some of the lowest and stay below both of the aforementioned cards, which are noisier. The cooler used (Twin Frozr 7) was not developed by MSI as a low-cost solution, but is based on the high-end Gaming X series from the previous generation of Nvidia Pascal graphics cards. The coils are also super-quiet, so it’s an overall solid design with a higher quality standard than is common in lower-end graphics cards. It’s also worth highlighting the higher clock speeds in games than declared in the specs. Boost GPU is faster by roughly 50–120 MHz (1854–1926 MHz depending on load).

For a PC for casual gaming in Full HD, this is an extremely attractive choice. It’s one of the cheapest options, yet with one of the most efficient (if not the most efficient within the price range) coolers. When the Ventus line comes up for debate in internet discussions, you often see a sort of disrespect. Perhaps also because more powerful GPU coolers on Ventus cards aren’t usually this generously oversized (it’s true that while the TDP of high-end GPUs has been increasing between generations, it’s significantly lower on the RTX 3050 than it is on the RTX 2060 Super, which this cooler is paired with), but that’s most certainly not the case with the RTX 3050.

This graphics card is exceedingly quiet, temperatures are low enough, and the Ventus 2X also has the advantage of a relatively smaller footprint. Unlike the already somewhat unnecessarily oversized three-fan variants, this card also fits into smaller/shorter cases with its space-saving two-slot height, so it doesn’t put too many restrictions for expanding a build with additional cards. The MSI RTX 3050 Ventus 2X 8G is, in short, very reasonably built in all respects, while also maintaining a pleasant price/performance ratio. So we see this as a well-deserved “Smart buy!” award at HWC.

English translation and edit by Jozef Dudáš


MSI RTX 3050 Ventus 2X 8G OC
+ Up to 1080p usually sufficient performance even at the highest graphics details
+ Very attractive price/performance ratio
+ Low power draw
+ High efficiency (i.e. high gaming and computing performance per watt)...
+ ... regardless of the load. Even in video playback and on the web, where the RX 6650 XT has significantly higher power draw
+ Efficient cooler – quiet operation and low temperature at the same time...
+ ... coolers of other cards in this class with comparable cooling performance are generally noisier
+ Exclusive DLSS, CUDA and OptiX support
+ Dual-slot design and overall smaller footprint
- Lower, often insufficient performance for raytracing graphics
- No illuminated elements (some might miss them in a gaming PC)
Recommended retail price: 369 EUR

/* Here you can add custom CSS for the current table */ /* Lean more about CSS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascading_Style_Sheets */ /* To prevent the use of styles to other tables use "#supsystic-table-1793" as a base selector for example: #supsystic-table-1793 { ... } #supsystic-table-1793 tbody { ... } #supsystic-table-1793 tbody tr { ... } */

We’ve got the test games from Jama levova

Continue: Metro Exodus with DXR and DLSS