AMD Instinct MI300A vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison between the AMD Instinct MI300A and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 is defined by an absence of shared benchmark data. The database contains no overlapping test results for these two accelerators, so a direct numerical comparison based on identical workloads cannot be constructed. What the record does provide is a single benchmark entry for the RTX 4010 and a completely empty benchmark array for the MI300A.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 has one recorded result: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2893. This places the card at the 18th percentile among all GPUs in the database, meaning approximately 82 percent of recorded graphics cards score higher. Its nearest rivals cluster tightly around this figure. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB averages 2907, which is 0.5 percent ahead of the RTX 4010. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF averages 2910, a 0.6 percent advantage. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB averages 2913, 0.7 percent ahead. The NVIDIA Quadro P600 averages 2923, 1 percent ahead. These deltas are small, and the RTX 4010 sits at the lower edge of a very close group of peers.

The AMD Instinct MI300A, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of zero and no recorded test results. Its percentile rank is 50, the median position, but that rank is assigned without supporting benchmark data. The MI300A also has no nearest rivals listed, which means no comparative scores exist to anchor it against any other accelerator in the database.

The practical reading of this data is straightforward. For the RTX 4010, the recorded measurements show a card that performs in line with a narrow band of similarly scored NVIDIA products, all within 1 percent of each other. For the MI300A, the database contains no measurements at all, so no performance claims can be derived from the recorded data. The wins tally reflects this: item A has zero wins, item B has zero wins. There are no head-to-head benchmark entries to resolve.

FAQ

Q: What is the only benchmark score recorded for the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010?

A: The RTX 4010 has a single recorded result: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2893.

Q: How does the RTX 4010 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RTX 4010 trails the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB by 0.5 percent, the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF by 0.6 percent, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB by 0.7 percent, and the NVIDIA Quadro P600 by 1 percent.

Q: Does the AMD Instinct MI300A have any recorded benchmark results?

A: No. The MI300A has an empty benchmark array, an average benchmark score of zero, and no nearest rivals listed in the database.

Q: What is the percentile rank of each product?

A: The RTX 4010 sits at the 18th percentile among all GPUs. The MI300A is listed at the 50th percentile, though that rank is not backed by any recorded benchmark score.

Q: What is the RTX 4010's predecessor and successor according to the database?

A: The predecessor is the GeForce 30 series, and the successor is the GeForce 50 series.

Q: What is the production status of each product?

A: The RTX 4010 is marked as Active. The MI300A has no production status recorded.

Architecture Differences

The two accelerators come from different manufacturers and use fundamentally different designs. The AMD Instinct MI300A is built on CDNA 3.0 architecture using a chip designated Aqua Vanjaram. It is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC and packs 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 150.4 million transistors per square millimeter. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 uses the Ampere architecture with the GA107 chip, built on an 8 nm process at Samsung, with 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, for a density of 43.5 million transistors per square millimeter.

The MI300A is an Instinct-series data center accelerator. Its shading units number 14,592, with 912 texture mapping units and zero ROPs. It has no recorded ray tracing cores, no tensor cores, and no pixel rate. Texture rate is listed at 1,915.2 GTexel/s, and FP32 performance is 61.29 TFLOPS. The RTX 4010 is a GeForce 40-series consumer card despite using an Ampere chip. It has 768 shading units, 24 TMUs, 16 ROPs, 6 ray tracing cores, and 24 tensor cores. Its pixel rate is 28.19 GPixel/s, texture rate is 42.29 GTexel/s, and FP32 performance is 2.706 TFLOPS. Its FP16 rate is the same at 2.706 TFLOPS, listed as a 1:1 ratio.

Memory architecture diverges sharply. The MI300A uses 128 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth. Memory clocks are 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective. The RTX 4010 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth, with memory clocks of 1500 MHz and 12 Gbps effective.

API support is another clear split. The MI300A reports no API support: DirectX is N/A, OpenGL is N/A, Vulkan is N/A. The RTX 4010 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Display outputs also differ. The MI300A has no outputs, while the RTX 4010 has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a connectors.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ in nearly every recorded specification field. Manufacturing: the MI300A uses a 5 nm TSMC process, while the RTX 4010 uses an 8 nm Samsung process. Transistor count: 153,000 million versus 8,700 million. Die size: 1017 mm² versus 200 mm². Transistor density: 150.4 million per mm² versus 43.5 million per mm².

Clock speeds: the MI300A has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2100 MHz, while the RTX 4010 has a base of 1417 MHz and a boost of 1762 MHz. Memory clocks: 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective for the MI300A, 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective for the RTX 4010.

Memory capacity: 128 GB versus 4 GB. Memory type: HBM3 versus GDDR6. Bus width: 8192 bit versus 64 bit. Bandwidth: 5.32 TB/s versus 96.00 GB/s.

Compute units: shading units 14,592 versus 768, TMUs 912 versus 24, ROPs 0 versus 16. Ray tracing cores: none recorded versus 6. Tensor cores: none recorded versus 24. Pixel rate: 0 MPixel/s versus 28.19 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 1,915.2 GTexel/s versus 42.29 GTexel/s. FP32: 61.29 TFLOPS versus 2.706 TFLOPS.

Power and physical design: the MI300A has a TDP of 750 W and a suggested PSU of 1150 W, while the RTX 4010 has a TDP of 50 W and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The MI300A uses an OAM Module slot width and has no power connectors, while the RTX 4010 is a Single-slot card also with no power connectors. Bus interface: PCIe 5.0 x16 for the MI300A, PCIe 4.0 x8 for the RTX 4010. Display outputs: none for the MI300A, four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a for the RTX 4010. The RTX 4010 has recorded dimensions of 163 mm length and 69 mm height; the MI300A has no dimensions recorded.

Release dates also differ: the MI300A launched on December 5, 2023, and the RTX 4010 on April 15, 2024. Neither product has a launch MSRP in the record.

The Verdict

The data does not support a performance verdict between these two accelerators because no shared benchmark exists. The MI300A has no recorded scores, and the RTX 4010 has exactly one. What the database does show is that they occupy entirely different product categories. The MI300A is a high-power, high-memory data center accelerator with 128 GB of HBM3, 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth, 61.29 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, and a 750 W TDP. The RTX 4010 is a low-power consumer card with 4 GB of GDDR6, 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth, 2.706 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, and a 50 W TDP. It also carries ray tracing and tensor cores, supports modern graphics APIs, and includes display outputs.

Selection between the two depends entirely on workload context. For compute-heavy data center tasks that require very large memory capacity and extreme memory bandwidth, the MI300A's specifications point clearly in that direction. For graphics output, API compatibility, and low power draw, the RTX 4010 is the only one of the two with any recorded support for those functions.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI300A wins on raw compute and memory resources. Its 128 GB of HBM3 memory dwarfs the RTX 4010's 4 GB of GDDR6. Its memory bandwidth of 5.32 TB/s is roughly 55 times higher than the RTX 4010's 96.00 GB/s. Its FP32 throughput of 61.29 TFLOPS is more than 22 times the RTX 4010's 2.706 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 1,915.2 GTexel/s is over 45 times higher. It uses a faster PCIe 5.0 x16 interface versus PCIe 4.0 x8. It also has a higher boost clock at 2100 MHz versus 1762 MHz, though its base clock is lower at 1000 MHz versus 1417 MHz.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 wins on features relevant to graphics and consumer use. It has 16 ROPs, 6 ray tracing cores, and 24 tensor cores, none of which exist on the MI300A. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI300A reports no API support. It has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the MI300A has none. Its pixel rate of 28.19 GPixel/s is real, versus 0 MPixel/s for the MI300A. It draws 50 W against the MI300A's 750 W and requires a 250 W suggested PSU versus 1150 W. It is a single-slot card with compact dimensions of 163 mm by 69 mm, and it is marked Active in production status. Its single recorded benchmark, 2893 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, places it at the 18th percentile, within 1 percent of four closely matched rivals. The MI300A has no benchmark score to place anywhere.