AMD Instinct MI300X vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a single direct comparison between these two accelerators, and the result is decisive. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Instinct MI300X scores 317994 against the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile's 109197, a delta of 191.2 percent in favor of the AMD part. That is not a marginal gap; the MI300X delivers nearly three times the raw compute throughput of the mobile NVIDIA GPU in this workload. The MI300X also sits at the 100th percentile among all GPUs in the database, meaning no recorded GPU scores higher on average. The RTX 4070 Mobile, by contrast, lands at the 73rd percentile, a strong position for a laptop part but nowhere near the absolute top.

Context from the nearest rivals clarifies the scale. The MI300X trails the NVIDIA B200 by 8 percent and the NVIDIA H200 NVL by 5 percent, while leading the NVIDIA L40S by 7.5 percent and the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation by 10.7 percent. Those are all professional or datacenter accelerators, and the MI300X sits comfortably among them, within single-digit percentage points of the fastest recorded NVIDIA offerings. The RTX 4070 Mobile's nearest rivals tell a different story: it is essentially tied with the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT at a 0 percent delta, trails the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 by only 0.5 percent, leads the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell by 1.1 percent, and trails the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 by 1.5 percent. The mobile GPU is competing with desktop parts from several generations, which is expected for a high-end laptop chip, but the performance envelope is entirely different from the MI300X's tier.

The OpenCL result alone is the only head-to-head benchmark in the database, but it reflects the fundamental positioning of both products. The MI300X is built to process massive workloads with enormous memory and bandwidth, while the RTX 4070 Mobile is designed to fit into a laptop chassis and deliver respectable performance within a strict power envelope. The 191.2 percent delta is the headline number, and it aligns with the architectural differences detailed below.

Architecture Differences

The MI300X uses AMD's CDNA 3.0 architecture on the Aqua Vanjaram chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC with 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die. That yields a transistor density of 150.4 million per square millimeter. The RTX 4070 Mobile uses NVIDIA's Ada Lovelace architecture on the AD106 chip, also fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, but with 22,900 million transistors on a 188 mm² die, resulting in 121.8 million transistors per square millimeter. The MI300X is a physically enormous chip, more than five times the die area of the mobile GPU, and it packs nearly seven times the transistor count.

Memory is where the two diverge most sharply. The MI300X carries 192 GB of HBM3 across an 8192-bit bus, delivering 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 4070 Mobile has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, with 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The MI300X offers 24 times the memory capacity and roughly 20.8 times the bandwidth. The memory clock figures reflect the different technologies: the MI300X runs at 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective, while the RTX 4070 Mobile runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective. Despite the higher effective data rate of GDDR6, the vastly wider HBM3 bus gives the MI300X an overwhelming bandwidth advantage.

Compute resources follow the same pattern. The MI300X has 19,456 shading units and 1,216 texture mapping units, with a texture rate of 2,553.6 GTexel/s. The RTX 4070 Mobile has 4,608 shading units and 144 TMUs, with a texture rate of 244.1 GTexel/s. The MI300X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 and FP16 (1:1), while the RTX 4070 Mobile delivers 15.62 TFLOPS of both precisions. The MI300X's FP32 throughput is roughly five times higher. Pixel rate is a notable difference: the MI300X records 0 MPixel/s with zero ROPs, because it is not designed for rasterization, while the RTX 4070 Mobile has 48 ROPs and an 81.36 GPixel/s pixel rate. The RTX 4070 Mobile also includes 36 ray tracing cores and 144 tensor cores, features the MI300X does not list at all. The MI300X is a compute-oriented accelerator with no display outputs, while the RTX 4070 Mobile supports portable-device-dependent displays and exposes DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI300X lists no graphics API support, reinforcing its role as a datacenter compute part rather than a rendering GPU.

Power and interface differences are equally stark. The MI300X has a TDP of 750 W, uses an OAM module slot, has no power connectors (likely relying on the module socket), and suggests a 1150 W power supply. It connects via PCIe 5.0 x16. The RTX 4070 Mobile has a 115 W TDP, uses an IGP slot format, has no power connectors, and connects via PCIe 4.0 x8. The MI300X draws more than six times the power of the mobile GPU, which is logical given its die size and memory subsystem.

The Verdict

The data indicates these are not competing products in any practical sense. The AMD Instinct MI300X is a datacenter accelerator aimed at compute-heavy workloads, with 192 GB of HBM3, 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth, and 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput. Its only recorded benchmark score places it at the 100th percentile, and its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA B200, H200 NVL, L40S, and RTX 6000 Ada Generation, all professional or server accelerators. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile is a laptop GPU with 8 GB of GDDR6, 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth, and 15.62 TFLOPS of FP32, sitting at the 73rd percentile and trading blows with desktop GPUs like the RTX 3090 and RX 6700 XT.

A buyer or system designer selecting between these two is not choosing within a single category. The MI300X cannot drive a display, has no graphics API support, and requires an OAM slot with a substantial power supply. The RTX 4070 Mobile is an integrated part for portable systems, supports modern graphics APIs, and includes ray tracing and tensor cores. The MI300X wins the only shared benchmark by 191.2 percent, but it also consumes 750 W versus 115 W and occupies a server module rather than a laptop board. The RTX 4070 Mobile wins on portability, feature set, and graphics capability, none of which are measured in the OpenCL score. From the recorded data alone, the MI300X is the clear compute leader, while the RTX 4070 Mobile is the only one of the two that can render graphics or fit in a mobile chassis.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD Instinct MI300X than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile in OpenCL?

A: The MI300X scores 317994 versus 109197, a 191.2 percent advantage.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference between the two?

A: The MI300X has 192 GB of HBM3, while the RTX 4070 Mobile has 8 GB of GDDR6.

Q: Does the MI300X support ray tracing or tensor operations?

A: The database lists no RT cores or tensor cores for the MI300X. The RTX 4070 Mobile includes 36 RT cores and 144 tensor cores.

Q: Can the MI300X output to a display?

A: No. The MI300X lists no display outputs and no graphics API support. The RTX 4070 Mobile's display outputs are portable-device dependent.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The MI300X has a 750 W TDP and suggests a 1150 W power supply. The RTX 4070 Mobile has a 115 W TDP with no suggested PSU listed.

Q: What percentile does each GPU occupy in the database?

A: The MI300X is at the 100th percentile, while the RTX 4070 Mobile is at the 73rd percentile.

Where Each One Wins

The MI300X wins decisively in any metric related to raw compute throughput. Its OpenCL score of 317994 is 191.2 percent higher than the RTX 4070 Mobile's 109197. It also leads in shading units (19,456 versus 4,608), TMUs (1,216 versus 144), FP32 and FP16 throughput (81.72 TFLOPS versus 15.62 TFLOPS), texture rate (2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 244.1 GTexel/s), memory capacity (192 GB versus 8 GB), memory bandwidth (5.32 TB/s versus 256.0 GB/s), and memory bus width (8192 bit versus 128 bit). It is a compute-focused accelerator, and the data reflects that focus.

The RTX 4070 Mobile wins in areas the MI300X does not address. It has 48 ROPs and an 81.36 GPixel/s pixel rate; the MI300X records 0 MPixel/s and zero ROPs. The RTX 4070 Mobile includes 36 RT cores and 144 tensor cores, features absent from the MI300X's specifications. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI300X lists N/A for all three APIs. The RTX 4070 Mobile has a 115 W TDP versus 750 W, uses an IGP slot format rather than an OAM module, and connects via PCIe 4.0 x8, which is less demanding than PCIe 5.0 x16. The RTX 4070 Mobile also has a higher base clock (1395 MHz versus 1000 MHz) and a higher memory clock (2000 MHz versus 1300 MHz), though its boost clock is lower (1695 MHz versus 2100 MHz). Its production status is listed as Active, while the MI300X's production status is not recorded.

Specification Differences

The two accelerators differ across nearly every recorded specification. The MI300X uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture on the Aqua Vanjaram chip; the RTX 4070 Mobile uses Ada Lovelace on AD106. Both use a 5 nm TSMC process, but the MI300X has 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, versus 22,900 million on 188 mm². Transistor density is 150.4M per mm² for the MI300X and 121.8M per mm² for the RTX 4070 Mobile. Base clocks are 1000 MHz versus 1395 MHz; boost clocks are 2100 MHz versus 1695 MHz. Memory clocks are 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective versus 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective.

Memory configuration: 192 GB HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth versus 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. Shading units: 19,456 versus 4,608. TMUs: 1,216 versus 144. ROPs: 0 versus 48. RT cores: not listed versus 36. Tensor cores: not listed versus 144. Pixel rate: 0 MPixel/s versus 81.36 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 244.1 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16: 81.72 TFLOPS versus 15.62 TFLOPS, both at a 1:1 ratio.

Power and form factor: the MI300X has a 750 W TDP, an OAM Module slot, no power connectors, and a suggested 1150 W PSU; the RTX 4070 Mobile has a 115 W TDP, an IGP slot, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU. Bus interfaces: PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs: none versus portable-device dependent. APIs: N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan on the MI300X, versus 12 Ultimate (12_2), 4.6, and 1.4 on the RTX 4070 Mobile. Release dates differ: 2023-12-05 for the MI300X and 2023-01-02 for the RTX 4070 Mobile. The MI300X's predecessor is Radeon Instinct; the RTX 4070 Mobile's predecessor is GeForce 30 Mobile and its successor is GeForce 50 Mobile. Neither part lists a launch MSRP in the database.