Nvidia GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop Review: 4GB of VRAM Goes Backwards

VitalyT

Posts: 6,032   +6,401
This is just typical nVidia BS. They were complaining there was chip shortage, so they couldn't make more cards to beat the scalpers. In the meantime, they found all the chips needed to create this abomination of a product to take full advantage of the current inflated market. Such card is worth $100 at best, but they are selling it for $300.
 
Last edited:

Theinsanegamer

Posts: 2,848   +4,513
"Now, there is a place in the market for 4GB VRAM cards, entry-level options like the GTX 1650 is one example where it makes sense"

Nope, it doesnt make any sense there either. Games like cities skylines are more then capable of running at ultra on a 1650 at 1080p, but need 6+GB of VRAM to run properly. With 4GB you are presented with stuttering and frame drops. Same with games like DOOM. Even on my RX 560 the 4GB limit hits before the GPU in some games, and that card is 1050ti level.

4GB needs to die. ESPECIALLY on a card like the 3050/ti that will be $200+ if we ever get it on the desktop. Only GT 1030 tier cards should be shipping with 4GB or less VRAM these days.
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 1,740   +1,791
TechSpot Elite
First off, Tim Schiesser, your laptop coverage here solidifies your status as the King of Kings. (y) (Y) :D

But moving on, I can see the 3050 ti as having a solid place in the gaming laptop sector. We have a user here that paid just over $1000 for one, and on Amazon there are some now below $900. Let's face it, at those prices it's very easy to see this as a leader in price\performance. And I wonder how many buyers purchase gaming laptops at these prices and expect to run games at max settings.

Now though I wish we could see charts with the previous gen performance leader, the 200+ watt 2080 in the mix again.
 

Vulcanproject

Posts: 1,438   +2,569
I have seen the odd RTX2060 notebook being cleared out of inventory at a discount and recommended people pick those up instead of this. This is a good test to link anyone that asks me again.
 

QuantumPhysics

Posts: 5,467   +6,266
I just bought an ASUS TUF A15 with a 3050Ti, 5800h, 512GB SSD, 16GB DDR4 for $1099 from Microcenter.

The purpose was to help my father do podcasting.

I can use it on the side to play STEAM games - even tho I have an Alienware R4 GTX1060 which I plan to replace with a 3080 or 4000 series.

The 144Hz screen looks great and performance is good on CS:Go in 1080p.

I definitely, for my own use, wouldn't buy anything less than the 3080 to play games when I take it on vacation.
 

Shadowboxer

Posts: 1,884   +1,497
This 3050ti does seem a bit pants but I’d be interested to see how much better it is than an integrated graphics solution. This reviewer has shown us that bigger, more expensive GPUs are faster but they haven’t shown us how much faster this is to say AMDs newest APUs.
 

Bawlsdeep

Posts: 141   +153
This is just typical nVidia BS. They were complaining there was chip shortage, so they couldn't make more cards to beat the scalpers. In the meantime, they found all the chips needed to create this abomination of a product to take full advantage of the current inflated market. Such card is worth $100 at best, but they are selling it for $300.

4GB was chosen to NOT make it good for miners and scalpers, obviously. This is not a high-end card so who cares.
 

maroon1

Posts: 78   +103
It make no sense to test Assassin’s Creed Valhalla on Very high setting when even the faster card with larger memory can't run it close to 60fps (Even RTX 2060 can't)

You say that GTX 1060 is faster in this game because of larger Vram but GTX 1060 drops at low as 30fps on 1080p. In reality most people will likely lower the setting on GTX 1060 to get fps. And when you drop setting the VRAM on RTX 3050 might not be an issue. You should alteast tried to use high setting instead of very high. VRAM limitation claim is based on setting that most people will not use and will not achieve close to 60fps anyway regardless of how big VRAM is


Same thing with Cyberpunk 2077. No reason to use ultra setting when even faster card was barely able to get playable performance. Even RTX 3060 drops way below 60fps. If you play at realistic setting that people should in real world, then 4GB vram might not cause an issue

So people buy budget gaming laptop to play at max setting ??? This one of the worse reviews I have seen and ignore that fact that setting used does NOT produce decent fps even on faster GPU with bigger vram.
 

maroon1

Posts: 78   +103
"In games that aren’t VRAM or CPU limited at 1080p, on average the 3050 Ti is within a few percent. However, the reduction in VRAM from 6GB to 4GB is a killer in titles like Assassin’s Creed Valhalla, Control, and Cyberpunk 2077 with ray tracing enabled""


But why use max setting ?? Cyberpunk 2077 ultra setting and RT off runs 39-32fps on RTX 2060 and GTX 1060 6GB on 25-20fps

In other words, GPU performance is limiting factor not video ram. 99% of gamers will not run game on ultra setting on these cards.

Now lower setting until RTX 2060 get close to 60fps and then test those setting on RTX 3050 Ti. This how a professional review test things. YOur review is rubbish, It uses unrealistic setting on budget GPU and then claim that 4GB video ram is too low.
4GB video ram can be limiting factor in some very few cases (like Death stranding at max), but not on Cyberpunk, Assassin's Creed or control because these card don't run well on max setting anyway even if you have bigger Vram.