Nvidia GeForce RTX 5050 8GB Graphics Card Review

Today is an odd one, as we have a card that to the general public, doesn’t exist: the RTX 5050. A card that, while it falls under the 50 series group of products, has some major differences that, on face value, suggest NVIDIA, along with many mainstream AIB partners, didn’t even want to show it. That’s why you’ll find a severe lack of content on the card, including all-important reviews. The big question, however, is why that’s the case. What’s being hidden, or are we looking at a card that is perhaps a little misunderstood and shouldn’t just be judged on its 8GB of GDDR6 memory and lacklustre specs? Nvidia GeForce RTX 5050 8GB At $249, it’s an interesting argument, as this is one of the cheapest NVIDIA cards we’ve seen for a while, and could be a rival to the all-important market that Intel have been slowly swallowing up as of late. With nothing at this price point from AMD, it’s an interesting move by the green team. However, if it’s anything like the RTX 3050 was when that launched – being pretty dead on arrival as an RTX-based card – then we could have history repeating itself. But as always, I’m humble enough that I’ll happily eat my own words, and that’s where the all-important benchmarks come in to see exactly what the lay of the land is, and how this card stacks up. https://youtu.be/PCu1VF2Yqu8 A Closer Look So let’s quickly discuss the market, because it’s an odd one. NVIDIA’s lowest-priced card until now was the RTX 5060, an 8GB card that launched for $299 and, in all honesty, not just from ourselves, but it wasn’t what I’d call, best received. That really came down to one key thing: 8GB of memory on a 128-bit bus. But it came with a difference, because at least it utilised GDDR7 memory to leverage some higher bandwidth. Though with games like Indiana Jones and Doom Eternal, to name a few, showcasing the issues that 8GB of VRAM presents in 2025, the RTX 5050 is already on the back foot, especially given that NVIDIA have plumped for GDDR6 instead, leading to a pretty measly, at least in the grand scheme of things, 320 GB/s of bandwidth. Comparing that to what AMD have, it’s very much the same. That features the same GDDR6 memory and uses the same 128-bit interface, so very similar in terms of bandwidth. While AMD and their partners didn’t want to send out the 8GB model for review, us and other reviewers made our own conclusions based on the 16GB model, and again we saw the 8GB variant dead on arrival. So you’ll probably be starting to see a bit of a trend with these cards, and it all comes down to the memory. 8GB isn’t enough, but why? When the RTX 30 series launched, some cards had 8GB of VRAM, and no one complained. Yes, it was a different time, as we take a trip down memory lane, but no one batted an eyelid. So what’s changed? Well, in all honesty, a lot of it comes down to the consumer, and sorry, but I’m going to blame you guys to a degree. We as gamers have been a little spoiled, so now it’s almost expected or a given to be able to run the latest games on max settings, even if at a lower resolution. It’s almost unacceptable to have anything less, and with higher settings generally having larger textures, or raytracing baked in, much like we see on games like Indiana Jones, which is a culprit of this, it just doesn’t fit the bill, and that leads to issues. Now, there is a caveat to all of this, and that comes down to price. If AMD, Intel, or even NVIDIA release a card that is below par in the court of public opinion, as long as the price stacks up, then there is a saving grace. And until now, we’ve not really had that, whereas the RTX 5050 coming in at $249 just scrapes into that margin that could see it considered as a worthy contender in the more budget-focused space. Not only content with butchering the memory design on this card, NVIDIA have also plumped for using the PCIe 5.0 x8 interface, whereas cards like the RX 9060 XT, even in its 8GB form, uses x16 bandwidth and is only $50 more. So there are many angles to take this from, but our focus is on how this GB207-based GPU performs in all of the latest games, if we can get them running at all. Now, while we did reach out to a lot of AIB partners to get a card, as mentioned, they were somewhat reluctant. Though Colorful came to the rescue with their Ultra W Duo OC model, and while we will have some more content specific to this model and its cooling capabilities, along with breaking down the card to look into the design and quality, today is all about the GB207-300-A1 core. A core that is only used on the 5050 series, including mobile and equivalent RTX PRO models. This particular model does improve on the stock clock speeds by increasing the boost clock by around 3% from 2572MHz up to 2647MHz, which isn’t a huge amount. But this is done through the one-key overclock button on the rear, which again we’ll be looking at in a separate review, while we stuck with the stock clocks, so our results will be pretty typical of what most RTX 5050 models will be like. How We Test We continue to update our testing methods around once per year. As such, we re-test older hardware to reflect changes over time. These can be driver updates, Windows updates, game patches, and more; all of which have an impact on performance figures. Furthermore, we update our test benches to newer and more relevant hardware. This means that our new reviews aren’t always comparable to those of older reviews, so please compare the testing methodology on older reviews should you be trying to compare them with newer ones. Replicate Our Results When it comes to our benchmarks in our reviews, the benchmarks are pretty self-explanatory and are kept as simple as possible, although there are a few exceptions. Remember that your choice of a graphics card, CPU, the silicon lottery, and other factors can yield different numbers, and there’s always a margin for error when using any software. Links are provided below, as well as the settings we use. We encourage you to not just look at how one product compares to any other, but how it compares to your own. If you’re looking to build a new system, you should benchmark your current PC using the benchmarks available to you. You should then look at the percentage improvement from your current hardware to the hardware tested here to give you a ballpark figure of how much of an upgrade this will provide you with. Processor Test Systems Test System (GPU) Motherboard Gigabyte B650E AORUS MASTER Buy Now Processor Ryzen 7 9800X3D Review Buy Now GPU Changes Per Review RAM 32 Corsair VENGEANCE RGB 6000MHz CL30 Review Buy Now CPU Cooler NZXT Kraken Z73 RGB Buy Now Power Supply NZXT C1000 Gold Review Buy Now Storage Seagate FIRECUDA 530 1TB Review Buy Now Chassis NZXT H9 Flow Review Buy Now OS Windows 11 Pro Version 21H2 Drivers Software We use a variety of software from different developers to assist in our testing and to give us the most consistent results possible. Some applications are specifically used for testing, while others are simply used for monitoring and to aid us in making sure that our results are as accurate as possible. Software Used 3DMark FireStrike & TimeSpy (download) Gaming To gauge performance levels which are easily reproduced time after time, by both ourselves and our readers, we now stick strictly to games default profiles. Given how powerful most modern cards are getting, we've began using more demanding profiles for most games, but will otherwise state on a per game basis if we use other profiles beyond High, Ultra, Maximum or their respective equivalent at all resolutions. V-Sync is always disabled in our testing, and all FPS caps that can be removed are. We also enable XMP and Resizable bar technology across all platforms to keep things as fair as possible. Games While we test a lot of games, it's not possible to display all of the data on the website or in our videos. Instead, we include access to all of our testing data for our Patreon members (link), where members get a ton of other benefits as well. What we do, however, is display charts for averages across all game titles to give a better picture of performance across all titles tested. A Plague Tale: Requiem Alan Wake II Baldur's Gate 3 Black Myth Wukong CS2 Cyberpunk 2077 F1 24 Fortnite Hogwarts Legacy Indiana Jones And The Great Circle Starfield War Thunder Resolutions 1080 (Full HD) 1440 4K Some tests will also include features such as NVIDIA DLSS and Ray Tracing. However, these will be clearly labelled and may only appear in reviews for graphics cards that support those features. Power Consumption Not being content with simply reading total system power draw, we now run F1 24 for an hour loop and measure power draw at the end of the loop for the most accurate measurement that represents real-world gameplay experience. Temperatures We take temperature readings after the same hour-long F1 24 loop with no other background programs running, again to simulate a real-world gaming experience. First up is A Plague Tale. The 5050 comes in bottom of our standings with 18% less performance than the ageing RTX 3060 Ti and 27% behind its bigger brother, the RTX 5060 8GB. It also shows that two years later and a $50 hair cut, it’s comparable to the RTX 4060, which isn’t a great look. In Alan Wake 2, the RTX 5050 just misses the mark if you’re looking to play at 1080p on the high preset, coming in at 57 FPS, which nigh on matches the RTX 4060 identically. This shows that by spending a little more, for instance, for the RX 9060 XT, you can net yourself another 74% more performance for 40% more cash. Moving over to Baldur’s Gate 3 and again, the 5050 isn’t looking great. Sure, it gives us playable framerates at 1080p on Ultra settings, though it’s not that demanding in terms of GPU performance, but it paints a better picture as to the generational improvements compared to the RTX 4060, or should I say, the lack thereof as it sits 11% behind the Ada Lovelace-based card. In Black Myth: Wukong, the RTX 5050 finally starts to move up our chart, sitting 4% ahead of the RX 7600 XT, but again coming in matching the RTX 4060’s performance at 51 FPS, though it does improve on the 1% lows, where the Ada-based card seems to have some issues, and retesting did garner the same result. Dialling settings in could help to bring performance up, but it still feels like a bit of a hollow victory when we think about gen-on-gen improvements. In Counter-Strike 2, the RTX 5050 comes in 7% faster than the RX 7600 XT, which shows that VRAM isn’t everything, considering this new Blackwell-based GPU comes packing half the amount. What is sad to see is that there’s no tangible difference for the most part between this card, the 3060 Ti and the RTX 4060 in the averages, as they all fall within a few percent of each other, though to not be overly critical, the 1% lows are much better, so at least there’s a silver lining. Moving over to Cyberpunk, the RTX 5050 is starting to actually look pretty decent and well worth the money. It’s here where we find the 5050 actually rubbing shoulders with its bigger brother, the RTX 5060, separated by a single FPS in both the averages and the 1% lows, and sitting 34% ahead of the RTX 4060 from last generation, and even coming in 5% faster than the 4060 Ti. If we start to see more results like this, we could be onto a winner. Sadly, we don’t, because as we move over to F1 24, the RTX 5050 is back on the bottom of our charts, coming in with 162 FPS, which again, puts it behind the RTX 4060, which again, doesn’t feel like it’s enough, as a next-generation card coming in with 12% less performance almost shows us why NVIDIA didn’t sample this card. I get that the RTX 4060 came in $50 more expensive at launch, but we’re two years on, and this essentially is the lowest-tier card of the 50 series, against the lowest-tier card from the 40 series. Now Indiana Jones is an interesting one, because it scored precisely 0. Not because it performed so badly, but because it simply didn’t run. For anyone who has played the game, you’ll know that the menu forms part of the game, and with this card, we couldn’t even get into it. This is a common occurrence we’ve seen with 8GB cards, and the only way to save it is to drop the texture pool size right down, which we could have done, though then it would make the comparative tests unfair, so it’s easier to give it a “did not finish”, or in this case, a “did not even start”. Again, if you hadn’t guessed by now, the RTX 5050 hugs the bottom of our chart again in Starfield, sitting below that 60 FPS threshold that most gamers crave, and falling 16% behind the RTX 4060, though the averages are definitely improved on the newer card, which will certainly help in the dips and lead to a smoother experience overall. But seeing above 60 FPS would have at least given a talking point, and something to use for marketing. Then in War Thunder, it’s much of the same again. The RTX 5050 sits narrowly behind the RTX 4060, sitting at a 5% margin behind, and while it’s enough to beat out the RX 7600 XT, I think gamers are just expecting more for their money. Looking at how this performed across the board, and the other 8GB cards there, it’s definitely showing that the lack of VRAM is holding this and other cards back. Overall Average FPS Across the 10 games tested, the RTX 5050 comes in with an average FPS of 127, which puts it 6% behind the RTX 4060, a card that is two years old. While it did launch for $299, compared to the $249 price tag of the RTX 5050, I feel that we’ve not really moved on from where things are, or have been. This also puts the 5050 14% behind the RTX 3060 Ti, an 8GB card that launched nearly five years ago, admittedly for a lot more money. But again, this starts to paint a picture as to where things are in terms of generational improvements, if any. To play devil’s advocate, the RTX 5050 did score 0 in Indiana Jones, so removing that result for both the RTX 5050 and RTX 4060 does give us a slightly different result in the averages, though again, not much has changed, as instead of the RTX 5050 being 6% behind, it’s now 4% behind. But at this point, it almost feels like I’m trying to make excuses for the card, and that’s not my intention at all. Ray Tracing Being an RTX card, maybe things start looking better in raytracing-based titles. Kicking things off with Alan Wake II, which as a caveat, has got upscaling set to balanced, because even on higher-tiered cards, it’s a necessity. It’s here where the RTX 5050 is looking promising. Not only do we see it moving up our standings, but we also see it scrape past the 60 FPS threshold, coming in at 61 frames per second. But this also means it comes in 5% faster than the RTX 4060. Not a huge uplift, but it’s something, and other titles may see some larger improvements. Sadly, in Black Myth: Wukong, that’s not the case, and it comes in as the worst-performing RTX card we’ve tested for these results, matching the performance of the RTX 3060 Ti, and falling 2 FPS behind the RTX 4060. The silver lining is that it does come in faster than the RX 9060 XT and even higher-end cards from the last two generations of AMD GPUs, but that’s more a testament as to how bad they were, and not how good this is. Cyberpunk’s rasterisation performance was pretty good, but enabling raytracing sees that performance plummet, and again, this feels very similar to what the RTX 3050 felt like when that was released. Almost like it should have never been an RTX card, and instead, NVIDIA should have brought back the GTX branding, or just not bothered to release the card at all. Lastly, in F1 24, we do see the RTX 5050 come in with 61 FPS, which is perfectly fine, but again, sitting at the bottom of our charts, makes it feel mediocre, especially again, when compared to the likes of the RTX 4060. This card should be not only matching its performance, but surpassing it, even if by a small margin, otherwise, this just feels like an RTX 4060 Lite. Ray Tracing Overall Averages Looking at the raytracing averages at 1080p, and I think it was pretty clear to see that again, much like rasterisation, it falls short. Not only do we find the RTX 5050 sitting 5% behind the RTX 4060, but the margin behind the RTX 3060 Ti stays pretty strong at 13%, with the only saving grace being that raytracing performance was so bad on the 7600 XT, that at least NVIDIA come in faster than something by a pretty impressive 20%. Again though, through fault of AMD, and not through the strength of NVIDIA on this occasion. Cost Per Frame So how do things look with the all-important cost per frame, because while the performance wasn’t amazing, this could be the bold difference that puts the RTX 5050 in a completely different light, due to its $249 price tag. It’s here where at MSRP, it actually doesn’t come out too bad comparatively speaking. The RTX 5050 comes in with a cost per frame of $1.96, which puts it 10 cents more expensive per frame than the RX 9060 XT, so all looks “okay”, but it’s very hard to ignore the 32% slower performance overall. It’s $100 more expensive granted, but also comes in with an extra level of longevity, due to the 16GB of VRAM, though if budget constraints were an important factor, the RTX 5060 comes in the best value at $1.81 per frame, but even then, I wouldn’t really recommend that, and instead would steer you towards the RX 9060 XT. It’s a funny game of, spend $50 more, get a bit more, spend another $50 more and get a bit more again, and while the RX 9060 XT is more expensive, it’s hard to deny that 16GB is the new normal, especially if you’re wanting to play games like Indiana Jones and similar, where you either get issues before the game runs, or get lacklustre performance when actually in game. In terms of real-world selling prices though, things look even worse for the RTX 5050. Not only is the 5060 still the better buy, the RX 9060 XT does fall behind, but we’re talking a single cent per frame, but for 60 FPS more on average. That’s a bit of a no-brainer considering what you get for the money, not just in terms of performance, but the whole package: double VRAM and all. Power & Temperatures Now I mentioned at the start that we have a Duo OC model from Colorful. With the RTX 5050 there is no “reference model” or Founders card, so instead, NVIDIA are relying on their AIB partners to bring cards to market and of course you’ll be expected to see MSRP cards, along with slightly more premium models coming in with a slightly higher price point, generally $20 or so more. This model being the Duo and the fact that Colorful have a triple-fan version too, this card is their MSRP offering, so if retailers play ball, you’d be expected to see this at the $249 price tag that it’s supposed to be. That aside, we obviously want to see how things do under a sustained level of load. It’s here where under an hour-long loop of F1 24 on the max settings, we found temperatures remained under control. Both the GPU and memory temperatures remained pretty consistent, sitting around 61 degrees on both with a fan speed at a very reasonable 1354 RPM. While I’m under no illusion that the triple-fan version would perform even better, I don’t think anyone would be upset by those numbers and how quiet the operation would be. Power-wise, the card used just under 130 Watts of power, showing that the card is quite efficient in the grand scheme of things and for the most part during a long session, sat under the 130 W TDP of the GPU core. In terms of clock speeds, the CPU clock hovered around the 2925MHz mark for the most part, while the memory consistently stayed at its rated 2500MHz or 20 Gbps Effective speed. Conclusion So, this is a card that, right from the start, just felt a bit… odd, and after putting it through its paces, it’s clear why. This isn’t a flagship, and it’s not even going to be setting any mid-range records, but at its $249 MSRP, it steps into a market that genuinely needs a bit of attention from NVIDIA. Purely on performance, the RTX 5050 doesn't exactly offer that next-gen jump we're usually looking for. Across our 10-game rasterisation tests, it was 6% slower than the RTX 4060, a card that's two years old now. When you compare it to the RTX 3060 Ti, which is nearly five years old, it's a more noticeable 14% behind. Yes, removing the "did not run" Indiana Jones result shifts that 5050 deficit to 4% against the RTX 4060, but honestly, it just feels like we're trying to make excuses for what is, fundamentally, a lack of progress. RTX or Not? Moving into raytracing, which is usually NVIDIA's strong point, the story here is pretty much the same. Alan Wake II did show a promising 5% lead over the RTX 4060, but that was just one game and had upscaling on. Overall though, the RTX 5050 ended up 5% behind the RTX 4060 and a significant 13% behind the RTX 3060 Ti in our raytracing averages. It's a card that, just like the RTX 3050 before it, almost makes you question if it should even have the "RTX" badge. Maybe bringing back the GTX branding, or simply not releasing the card at all, would have been a clearer message. Pricing Now, the big one – pricing. At $249, the RTX 5050 initially looked like it could be NVIDIA’s answer for the budget market, especially with AMD not really having anything at this exact price point. Our cost-per-frame shows that, on paper, it isn’t terrible, but here’s the kicker: it’s 10 cents more expensive per frame than the RX 9060 XT, yet it gives you 32% less overall performance. That’s a tough pill to swallow when you think about the longevity that 16GB of VRAM offers, especially when games like Indiana Jones just flat out refuse to run on 8GB cards. Stock Availability Let's be honest though, the big question mark always hangs over real-world selling prices. We mentioned how hard it was to even get our hands on an RTX 5050 for review, and it's the same story with an 8GB RX 9060 XT. If NVIDIA and their AIB partners aren't keen on sending out samples, that pretty much tells you all you need to know. The reality is, if we had an 8GB RX 9060 XT, things would look even worse for the RTX 5050, as that card should come in much closer to its 16GB sibling, pushing the 5050 even further down the value chain. Adding to that, the PCIe 5.0 x8 interface on the RTX 5050, compared to the x16 on the RX 9060 XT (even in its potential 8GB form), is another limitation that just screams cost-cutting. While the Colorful Ultra W Duo OC model we tested was well-behaved for temps and power efficiency, running quietly and cool under load, the core performance just isn't there to make it a standout product. 8GB in 2025 is a Stretch Ultimately, what's clear is that NVIDIA, with the RTX 5050, seems to be focusing on hitting a price point, rather than truly innovating or offering a big generational upgrade at the entry level. While they push AI upscaling with DLSS, AMD's approach with the RX 9060 XT, focusing on strong rasterisation and improved raytracing at a competitive price with plenty of VRAM, feels more aligned with what mainstream gamers need in 2025. It really hammers home the point that 16GB is becoming the new normal, and any 8GB card, regardless of who makes it, is going to struggle for relevance and longevity. For now, that's going to wrap up this review of the new GeForce RTX 5050 from NVIDIA. Hopefully, you enjoyed this one, and we will be doing our utmost to get an 8GB RX 9060 XT and those all-important Intel cards for comparisons.

Ray Tracing Overall Averages

Read Next

RTX 3050 vs. RTX 5050 – 30 Games Benchmarked

RX 9060 XT Vs RTX 5060 Ti 16GB – 30 Games Tested

AMD RX 9060 XT Vs NVIDIA RTX 5060 – 30 Games Benchmarked @ 1080p, 1440p & 4K

INNO3D RTX 5060 Ti 16GB Twin X2 Graphics Card Review

AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT Review Ft Sapphire Nitro+ & XFX SWFT

Sapphire RX 9070 XT NITRO+ Graphics Card Review

NVIDIA RTX 5060 Ti Graphics Card Review

PNY Nvidia RTX 5070 Ti OC Graphics Card Review

MSI RTX 5090 SUPRIM SOC Graphics Card Review

INNO3D Nvidia RTX 5070 Ti X3 Graphics Card Review

MSI Ventus 3X RTX 5070 Ti OC Graphics Card Review

MSI SUPRIM RTX 5080 SOC Graphics Card Review

Graphics Card MSRP Pricing is Fake

AMD Radeon RX 9070 & 9070 XT Graphics Card Review

Nvidia RTX 5070 Founders Edition Graphics Card Review

AMD RDNA4 Architecture: Complete Overview and Analysis

INNO3D RTX 5080 X3 Graphics Card Review

Zotac Gaming RTX 5080 AMP Extreme Graphics Card Review

Kingdom Come: Deliverance II Performance – 40 Graphics Cards Tested!

ASUS RTX 5080 TUF Gaming Graphics Card Review

Related Articles

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

ROG Xbox Ally and Ally X Prices Leaked Ahead of Official Announcement

Powercolor Hellhound 7900 XT Tested – Just How Effective is FSR?

Intel® Core™ Ultra 9 Desktop Processor 285K 24 cores

Adblock Detected