AMD Instinct MI300 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER Comparison

The AMD Instinct MI300 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER occupy entirely different corners of the GPU landscape. The MI300 is a data center accelerator built around the CDNA 3.0 architecture, while the RTX 4070 SUPER is a consumer graphics card based on Ada Lovelace. The recorded data shows that the RTX 4070 SUPER holds all benchmark scores in the database, while the MI300 has no recorded benchmark entries. However, the architectural differences between the two are substantial, and each part serves a distinct purpose based on its physical design, memory subsystem, and feature set.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Instinct MI300 uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture, implemented on the Aqua Vanjaram chip. This is a 5 nm design from TSMC, containing 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die. The transistor density is 150.4 million per square millimeter. The MI300 is part of the Instinct (MIx) generation, succeeding the Radeon Instinct line. Its release date is recorded as January 3, 2023.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER uses the Ada Lovelace architecture, built on the AD104 chip. It is also a 5 nm TSMC design, but with 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, giving a density of 121.8 million per square millimeter. The RTX 4070 SUPER belongs to the GeForce 40-series, succeeding the GeForce 30 generation and preceding the GeForce 50 series. Its release date is January 16, 2024, and its production status is recorded as end-of-life.

The memory subsystems diverge sharply. The MI300 carries 128 GB of HBM3 memory across an 8192-bit bus, delivering 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock is 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective data rate. The RTX 4070 SUPER has 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth, with a memory clock of 1313 MHz and 21 Gbps effective rate. The MI300 offers roughly ten times the memory capacity and over ten times the bandwidth, as measured by the recorded figures.

Compute resources also differ. The MI300 has 14,080 shading units, 880 texture mapping units, and zero ROPs, reflecting its compute-focused design. Its pixel rate is recorded as 0 MPixel/s, and its texture rate is 1,496.0 GTexel/s. The RTX 4070 SUPER has 7,168 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. Its pixel rate is 198.0 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 554.4 GTexel/s. The MI300 doubles the shading unit count and quadruples the TMU count, but the RTX 4070 SUPER has the full set of rasterization hardware.

The MI300 delivers 47.87 TFLOPS of FP32 and FP16 compute, with a 1:1 ratio. The RTX 4070 SUPER delivers 35.48 TFLOPS of FP32 and FP16, also at 1:1. The MI300 leads by roughly 35% in raw floating-point throughput. The RTX 4070 SUPER includes 56 RT cores and 224 tensor cores, while the MI300 records null values for both, meaning the data does not assign any ray tracing or tensor core hardware to the accelerator.

Clock speeds favor the NVIDIA part. The MI300 runs at a base of 1000 MHz and a boost of 1700 MHz. The RTX 4070 SUPER runs at a base of 1980 MHz and a boost of 2475 MHz. The NVIDIA card boosts to nearly 1.5 times the MI300's boost clock.

Power and interface details separate the two further. The MI300 has a 600 W TDP with 2x 8-pin power connectors and a suggested 1000 W PSU. The RTX 4070 SUPER has a 220 W TDP with a 1x 16-pin connector and a suggested 550 W PSU. The MI300 uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the RTX 4070 SUPER uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The MI300 has no display outputs, while the RTX 4070 SUPER has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The MI300 has no API support for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan, while the RTX 4070 SUPER supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4070 SUPER wins in every recorded benchmark category because it is the only one of the two with benchmark entries in the database. The MI300 has zero recorded benchmarks, an average score of zero, and no nearest rivals. The RTX 4070 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 43,223 and sits at the 83rd percentile among all GPUs. The MI300 sits at the 50th percentile with no scores to support that position.

The RTX 4070 SUPER also wins on power efficiency. It delivers 35.48 TFLOPS of FP32 at 220 W, while the MI300 delivers 47.87 TFLOPS at 600 W. The NVIDIA part produces more compute per watt according to the recorded TDP figures. The MI300's advantage is in peak throughput and memory capacity, but that comes with a much higher power draw.

For gaming and graphics workloads, the RTX 4070 SUPER is the only viable option between the two. It has ROPs, RT cores, tensor cores, display outputs, and full graphics API support. The MI300 has zero ROPs, no RT cores, no tensor cores, no display outputs, and no graphics API support. The data indicates that the MI300 cannot output video at all.

For compute workloads, the MI300 offers a larger memory pool, wider memory bus, and higher raw FP32 and FP16 throughput. The 128 GB capacity and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth are designed for large model training and inference workloads. The RTX 4070 SUPER's 12 GB and 504.2 GB/s are far smaller, limiting it to smaller data sets.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark list between the two is empty. The MI300 has no benchmark scores, so there are no direct comparisons recorded. The RTX 4070 SUPER has ten individual benchmark entries. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 4,627. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 172,795. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 205,624. Passmark results include 167 in DirectX 10, 273 in DirectX 11, 110 in DirectX 12, 344 in DirectX 9, 1,184 in G2D, 29,995 in G3D, and 17,108 in GPU compute.

The nearest rivals for the RTX 4070 SUPER show how close its average score is to competing parts. The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB has an average score of 43,262, a delta of -0.1% from the RTX 4070 SUPER. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile scores 43,268, also -0.1%. The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 scores 43,301, a -0.2% delta. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile scores 43,667, a -1% delta. All four rivals are within 1% of the RTX 4070 SUPER, indicating that its average score sits in a tightly packed performance band.

The MI300, by contrast, has no rivals listed and no scores to compare. Its average benchmark score is zero, which places it at the 50th percentile in the database's ranking, but that percentile is not supported by any measured performance data. The RTX 4070 SUPER's 83rd percentile is backed by its recorded scores.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300 has 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth from 128 GB of HBM3 memory on an 8192-bit bus. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER has 504.2 GB/s from 12 GB of GDDR6X on a 192-bit bus.

Q: Does the AMD Instinct MI300 support graphics APIs?

A: No. The recorded data lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A for the MI300. The RTX 4070 SUPER supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the FP32 compute difference?

A: The MI300 delivers 47.87 TFLOPS of FP32, while the RTX 4070 SUPER delivers 35.48 TFLOPS. The MI300 leads by approximately 35%.

Q: Which card has ray tracing hardware?

A: The RTX 4070 SUPER has 56 RT cores. The MI300 records null values for RT cores, meaning no ray tracing hardware is assigned in the data.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The MI300 has a 600 W TDP and a suggested 1000 W PSU. The RTX 4070 SUPER has a 220 W TDP and a suggested 550 W PSU.

Q: Does the MI300 have any display outputs?

A: No. The MI300 lists "No outputs" for display connections. The RTX 4070 SUPER has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split: the RTX 4070 SUPER is the only one of the two with measured benchmark performance, graphics capability, and consumer features. Its average score of 43,223 and 83rd percentile rank are backed by ten recorded tests. The MI300 has no benchmark scores, no average, and no rivals. Anyone choosing between these two for graphics, gaming, or any workload requiring display output must select the RTX 4070 SUPER. The MI300 cannot render frames to a screen, has no graphics API support, and has no ROPs.

The MI300's case rests entirely on its compute and memory specifications. It provides 128 GB of HBM3, 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth, and 47.87 TFLOPS of FP32. The RTX 4070 SUPER provides 12 GB, 504.2 GB/s, and 35.48 TFLOPS. For large-scale compute tasks that fit within the MI300's architecture, the accelerator offers more capacity and throughput. However, the data does not include any benchmark results to confirm real-world performance. The RTX 4070 SUPER's recorded scores show it competes within 1% of several NVIDIA professional and mobile parts, including the Quadro M6000 24 GB, RTX 5050 Mobile, Quadro M6000, and RTX 4090 Mobile.

The RTX 4070 SUPER also holds the efficiency advantage. It produces 35.48 TFLOPS at 220 W, while the MI300 produces 47.87 TFLOPS at 600 W. The NVIDIA card is also smaller in die area, 294 mm² versus 1017 mm², and uses fewer transistors, 35,800 million versus 153,000 million.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ in nearly every recorded specification. The MI300 uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture, the RTX 4070 SUPER uses Ada Lovelace. The MI300 has 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die with a density of 150.4M / mm². The RTX 4070 SUPER has 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die with a density of 121.8M / mm². The MI300 has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost of 1700 MHz. The RTX 4070 SUPER has a base of 1980 MHz and a boost of 2475 MHz. The MI300 memory clock is 1300 MHz at 5.2 Gbps effective, while the RTX 4070 SUPER is 1313 MHz at 21 Gbps effective.

Memory capacity is 128 GB HBM3 for the MI300 and 12 GB GDDR6X for the RTX 4070 SUPER. Bus width is 8192 bit versus 192 bit. Bandwidth is 5.32 TB/s versus 504.2 GB/s. The MI300 has 14,080 shading units, 880 TMUs, and 0 ROPs. The RTX 4070 SUPER has 7,168 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. The MI300 has no RT cores or tensor cores recorded, while the RTX 4070 SUPER has 56 RT cores and 224 tensor cores. Pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s for the MI300 and 198.0 GPixel/s for the RTX 4070 SUPER. Texture rate is 1,496.0 GTexel/s versus 554.4 GTexel/s. FP32 is 47.87 TFLOPS versus 35.48 TFLOPS, and FP16 is the same at 47.87 versus 35.48.

TDP is 600 W for the MI300 and 220 W for the RTX 4070 SUPER. Power connectors are 2x 8-pin versus 1x 16-pin. Suggested PSU is 1000 W versus 550 W. Bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x16. The MI300 has no display outputs, while the RTX 4070 SUPER has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The MI300 lists no API support, while the RTX 4070 SUPER supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI300 is 267 mm long and 111 mm tall, while the RTX 4070 SUPER is 267 mm long, 112 mm tall, and 42 mm wide. The RTX 4070 SUPER is dual-slot and has a launch MSRP of 599 USD. The MI300 has no launch MSRP recorded.