AMD Instinct MI300X vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER Comparison

AMD Instinct MI300X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER occupy opposite ends of the hardware spectrum. The Instinct MI300X is a data-center accelerator built for massive parallel compute, while the RTX 5070 SUPER is a consumer graphics card aimed at rasterization and ray tracing. The recorded benchmark data reflects this divide, with each product scoring in entirely different test categories. The MI300X delivers a Geekbench OpenCL score of 317,994, placing it in the 100th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The RTX 5070 SUPER produces a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,690, sitting in the 18th percentile. These numbers cannot be directly compared, as they measure different workloads, but they reveal how each product is positioned relative to its own competitive set.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark table between these two products is empty, meaning no common test was run on both cards. The database contains only their respective individual benchmark results. The MI300X’s Geekbench OpenCL score of 317,994 is its sole recorded metric, and it stands well above several NVIDIA data-center parts. Against the NVIDIA H200 NVL, which averages 334,891, the MI300X trails by 5%. Against the NVIDIA B200, which averages 345,482, the MI300X is behind by 8%. However, the MI300X leads the NVIDIA L40S, which averages 295,763, by 7.5%, and it beats the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation, which averages 287,237, by 10.7%. This places the MI300X in a competitive band among high-end accelerators, roughly between the L40S and the H200 NVL in raw OpenCL compute.

The RTX 5070 SUPER’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,690 is its only recorded benchmark. Its nearest rivals are all much older or lower-tier GPUs. The NVIDIA Quadro K1100M averages 2,664, which puts the RTX 5070 SUPER ahead by 1%. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 averages 2,662, a 1.1% lead for the RTX 5070 SUPER. The Intel Arc Pro B50 averages 2,660, also a 1.1% advantage. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 440 averages 2,645, giving the RTX 5070 SUPER a 1.7% edge. These deltas are small, indicating that the RTX 5070 SUPER’s recorded score sits in a cluster of low-performing GPUs within this specific test. The 18th percentile ranking confirms that this result is well below the median of all GPUs in the database.

Because the two products have no shared benchmark, direct numerical comparison is impossible. The MI300X’s OpenCL result is over 100 times larger than the RTX 5070 SUPER’s 3DMark score, but the workloads are entirely different. OpenCL on a data-center GPU exercises compute throughput, while 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 tests gaming-oriented rendering. The data shows that the MI300X is a dominant compute part, while the RTX 5070 SUPER’s single recorded score is modest relative to its own product generation.

Where Each One Wins

The MI300X wins decisively in compute density and memory capacity. Its 19,456 shading units, 1,216 texture mapping units, and 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 performance indicate a design optimized for massive parallel workloads. The FP16 figure is also 81.72 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, meaning the card does not rely on reduced precision to boost throughput. Texture rate is recorded at 2,553.6 GTexel/s, and the memory subsystem provides 192 GB of HBM3 across an 8,192-bit bus, yielding 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth. These specifications support the 317,994 OpenCL score, which outpaces several NVIDIA accelerators in the database. The MI300X’s 100th percentile ranking means it outperforms virtually all other GPUs in the recorded OpenCL test.

The RTX 5070 SUPER wins in graphics-specific features and consumer interface support. It has 50 ray tracing cores and 200 tensor cores, which are absent from the MI300X’s specification sheet. The RTX 5070 SUPER supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI300X lists no graphics API support at all. The RTX 5070 SUPER also has display outputs, including 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b, whereas the MI300X has no display outputs. Pixel rate for the RTX 5070 SUPER is recorded at 201.0 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 502.4 GTexel/s. The card’s 18 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 192-bit bus provides 672.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is far lower than the MI300X but appropriate for a consumer card.

For use cases, the MI300X targets AI training, scientific simulation, and large-scale data processing where memory capacity and compute throughput are paramount. Its 192 GB memory and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth allow it to hold massive models and datasets. The RTX 5070 SUPER targets gaming and workstation graphics, with ray tracing cores and tensor cores that accelerate real-time rendering and AI-assisted features. The absence of any common benchmark means the database cannot show a direct win for either card in a shared workload. Each product wins in its own domain, defined by the hardware features and the benchmark results recorded for it.

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Instinct MI300X compare to the NVIDIA H200 NVL in OpenCL performance?

A: The MI300X scores 317,994 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the H200 NVL averages 334,891. This puts the MI300X 5% behind the H200 NVL in this specific test.

Q: What is the RTX 5070 SUPER’s percentile ranking, and what does it mean?

A: The RTX 5070 SUPER’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,690 places it in the 18th percentile of all GPUs in the database. This means 82% of recorded GPUs score higher in this test.

Q: Which NVIDIA rival does the MI300X beat by the largest margin?

A: The MI300X leads the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation by 10.7%, with the MI300X scoring 317,994 versus the RTX 6000 Ada’s average of 287,237.

Q: Does the RTX 5070 SUPER have any advantage in memory bandwidth over the MI300X?

A: No. The MI300X has 5.32 TB/s of memory bandwidth, while the RTX 5070 SUPER has 672.0 GB/s. The MI300X’s HBM3 memory and 8,192-bit bus vastly exceed the RTX 5070 SUPER’s GDDR7 and 192-bit bus.

Q: What are the closest rivals to the RTX 5070 SUPER in its recorded benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K1100M averages 2,664, the GeForce GT 1030 averages 2,662, and the Intel Arc Pro B50 averages 2,660. The RTX 5070 SUPER leads each by 1% to 1.1%.

Q: Which product supports DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: Only the RTX 5070 SUPER supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), along with OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The MI300X lists no graphics API support.

Specification Differences

The two products differ in nearly every major specification category. The MI300X uses 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, while the RTX 5070 SUPER uses 31,100 million transistors on a 263 mm² die. Transistor density is 150.4 million per mm² for the MI300X and 118.3 million per mm² for the RTX 5070 SUPER. Both are manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The MI300X has 19,456 shading units and 1,216 TMUs, while the RTX 5070 SUPER has 6,400 shading units and 200 TMUs. The MI300X has 0 ROPs, while the RTX 5070 SUPER has 80. The MI300X has no ray tracing cores or tensor cores listed, while the RTX 5070 SUPER has 50 RT cores and 200 tensor cores.

Clock speeds differ significantly. The MI300X has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2100 MHz. The RTX 5070 SUPER has a base clock of 2325 MHz and a boost clock of 2512 MHz. Memory clocks are 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective for the MI300X, and 1750 MHz with 28 Gbps effective for the RTX 5070 SUPER. Memory size is 192 GB HBM3 for the MI300X versus 18 GB GDDR7 for the RTX 5070 SUPER. Bus width is 8,192 bits versus 192 bits. Bandwidth is 5.32 TB/s versus 672.0 GB/s.

Pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s for the MI300X and 201.0 GPixel/s for the RTX 5070 SUPER. Texture rate is 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 502.4 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 81.72 TFLOPS for the MI300X and 32.15 TFLOPS for the RTX 5070 SUPER. FP16 is also 81.72 TFLOPS (1:1) for the MI300X and 32.15 TFLOPS (1:1) for the RTX 5070 SUPER. TDP is 750 W for the MI300X and 275 W for the RTX 5070 SUPER. The MI300X uses an OAM module with no power connectors, while the RTX 5070 SUPER is dual-slot with a single 16-pin connector. The suggested PSU is 1150 W for the MI300X, with no value recorded for the RTX 5070 SUPER.

The MI300X has no display outputs, while the RTX 5070 SUPER has 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b. Dimensions are recorded only for the RTX 5070 SUPER, at 245 mm length, 115 mm height, and 40 mm width. The MI300X has no listed dimensions. The RTX 5070 SUPER is marked as Active in production status, while the MI300X has no production status recorded. Release dates are December 5, 2023 for the MI300X and December 31, 2025 for the RTX 5070 SUPER.

Architecture Differences

The MI300X uses the Aqua Vanjaram chip with CDNA 3.0 architecture, belonging to the Instinct (MIx) generation. The RTX 5070 SUPER uses the GB205 chip with Blackwell 2.0 architecture, belonging to the GeForce 50 series. The MI300X is built for compute-only workloads, as evidenced by its lack of graphics API support, no display outputs, and zero ROPs. Its 192 GB HBM3 memory and 8,192-bit bus are designed for data-center scale problems. The RTX 5070 SUPER, by contrast, includes ray tracing cores and tensor cores, which are specialized for graphics rendering and AI acceleration in consumer applications. Its 18 GB GDDR7 memory and 192-bit bus are typical for a mainstream graphics card.

The MI300X’s predecessor is listed as Radeon Instinct, while the RTX 5070 SUPER has no predecessor recorded. The MI300X has no successor listed, and neither does the RTX 5070 SUPER. The MI300X has a transistor density of 150.4 million per mm², higher than the RTX 5070 SUPER’s 118.3 million per mm², despite both using the same 5 nm TSMC process. The MI300X’s die size of 1017 mm² is nearly four times larger than the RTX 5070 SUPER’s 263 mm². The MI300X’s FP32 and FP16 compute are identical at 81.72 TFLOPS, indicating a 1:1 ratio with no separate tensor path. The RTX 5070 SUPER also has a 1:1 FP32 to FP16 ratio at 32.15 TFLOPS, but its tensor cores provide additional AI-specific throughput not measured in the recorded benchmarks.

The MI300X supports no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan versions, while the RTX 5070 SUPER supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI300X’s bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16, the same as the RTX 5070 SUPER. Power delivery differs, with the MI300X requiring 750 W TDP and an 1150 W suggested PSU, while the RTX 5070 SUPER has a 275 W TDP and no suggested PSU recorded. The MI300X uses an OAM module form factor, while the RTX 5070 SUPER is a dual-slot card with a 16-pin power connector. These architectural differences explain the benchmark outcomes: the MI300X excels at compute workloads measured by OpenCL, while the RTX 5070 SUPER’s recorded 3DMark score reflects its graphics-oriented design. The database contains no shared test, so the two products cannot be ranked against each other in a single metric.