AMD Instinct MI308X vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Instinct MI308X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER occupy opposite ends of the GPU spectrum. The MI308X is a compute accelerator with no benchmark scores recorded in the database, while the RTX 4070 SUPER has a full suite of results. The MI308X holds a 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs, whereas the RTX 4070 SUPER sits at the 83rd percentile. The database shows zero wins for the MI308X and zero wins for the RTX 4070 SUPER in direct head-to-head comparisons, because no common benchmark tests were run on both cards. The RTX 4070 SUPER delivers an average benchmark score of 43,223 across ten tests, with its nearest rivals being the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB at 43,262 (0.1% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile at 43,268 (0.1% higher), the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 at 43,301 (0.2% higher), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile at 43,667 (1% higher). The RTX 4070 SUPER trails its closest competitor, the RTX 4090 Mobile, by only 1%, a minimal margin in real-world terms.

Looking at specific results, the RTX 4070 SUPER posts its strongest showing in Geekbench Vulkan with a score of 205,624, followed by Geekbench OpenCL at 172,795. In Passmark, the GPU compute score is 17,108, while the G3D score reaches 29,995. The DirectX 9 test yields 344, DirectX 11 yields 273, DirectX 10 yields 167, and DirectX 12 yields 110. The 2D graphics score is 1,184. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test produces 4,627. These numbers indicate that the RTX 4070 SUPER performs consistently across modern and legacy APIs, with Vulkan and OpenCL results showing strong compute throughput.

The MI308X, by contrast, has no benchmark entries, no average score, and no nearest rivals listed. Its percentile rank of 50 suggests it stands at the median of the database, but without recorded measurements, direct numerical comparisons are impossible. The data indicates that the MI308X prioritizes raw compute specifications over gaming or workstation benchmarks, as evidenced by its 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 throughput versus the RTX 4070 SUPER's 35.48 TFLOPS. The MI308X also delivers 5.32 TB/s of memory bandwidth, a figure that dwarfs the RTX 4070 SUPER's 504.2 GB/s. These specification gaps are the primary differentiators, since no benchmark scores exist to quantify real-world performance.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more raw compute power?

A: The AMD Instinct MI308X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 and 81.72 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1), while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER provides 35.48 TFLOPS FP32 and 35.48 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1). The MI308X offers more than double the floating-point throughput.

Q: How do their memory subsystems compare?

A: The MI308X uses 192 GB of HBM3 with an 8192-bit bus and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4070 SUPER uses 12 GB of GDDR6X with a 192-bit bus and 504.2 GB/s bandwidth. The MI308X has 16 times the memory capacity and over 10 times the bandwidth.

Q: Which card supports modern graphics APIs?

A: The RTX 4070 SUPER supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI308X has no API support listed, with DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan all marked as N/A.

Q: What are the physical dimensions and power requirements?

A: The RTX 4070 SUPER is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm in length, 112 mm in height, and 42 mm in width, with a TDP of 220 W and a suggested PSU of 550 W. The MI308X is an OAM Module with no listed dimensions, a TDP of 750 W, and a suggested PSU of 1150 W.

Q: When did each card launch?

A: The MI308X launched on December 5, 2023. The RTX 4070 SUPER launched on January 16, 2024, and its production status is end-of-life. The MI308X's production status is not recorded.

Q: Does the MI308X have any display outputs?

A: No. The MI308X has no display outputs, while the RTX 4070 SUPER includes 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Architecture Differences

The MI308X uses the Aqua Vanjaram chip built on CDNA 3.0 architecture, while the RTX 4070 SUPER uses the AD104 chip on Ada Lovelace architecture. Both are fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm process, but the transistor counts differ substantially. The MI308X packs 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, yielding a density of 150.4 million transistors per mm². The RTX 4070 SUPER contains 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, with a density of 121.8 million per mm². The MI308X's die is over three times larger and holds over four times the transistors.

The MI308X has 19,456 shading units and 1,216 TMUs, but zero ROPs and no RT or tensor cores listed. Its pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s, and its texture rate is 2,553.6 GTexel/s. The RTX 4070 SUPER has 7,168 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 80 ROPs, along with 56 RT cores and 224 tensor cores. Its pixel rate is 198.0 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 554.4 GTexel/s. The MI308X is designed for compute workloads, lacking the graphics pipeline components entirely, whereas the RTX 4070 SUPER includes full ray tracing and tensor acceleration hardware.

The MI308X supports PCIe 5.0 x16, while the RTX 4070 SUPER uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The MI308X has no power connectors, because it is an OAM module, while the RTX 4070 SUPER uses a single 16-pin connector. Both cards use the same 5 nm process node and TSMC foundry, but the architectural goals are fundamentally different: CDNA 3.0 targets data center compute, Ada Lovelace targets consumer graphics.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two cards:

• Chip: Aqua Vanjaram (MI308X) versus AD104 (RTX 4070 SUPER)
• Architecture: CDNA 3.0 versus Ada Lovelace
• Generation: Instinct (MIx) versus GeForce 40
• Transistors: 153,000 million versus 35,800 million
• Die Size: 1017 mm² versus 294 mm²
• Transistor Density: 150.4M / mm² versus 121.8M / mm²
• Base Clock: 1000 MHz versus 1980 MHz
• Boost Clock: 2100 MHz versus 2475 MHz
• Memory Clock: 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective) versus 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective)
• Memory Size: 192 GB versus 12 GB
• Memory Type: HBM3 versus GDDR6X
• Memory Bus: 8192 bit versus 192 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 5.32 TB/s versus 504.2 GB/s
• Shading Units: 19,456 versus 7,168
• TMUs: 1,216 versus 224
• ROPs: 0 versus 80
• RT Cores: Not listed versus 56
• Tensor Cores: Not listed versus 224
• Pixel Rate: 0 MPixel/s versus 198.0 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 554.4 GTexel/s
• FP32: 81.72 TFLOPS versus 35.48 TFLOPS
• FP16: 81.72 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 35.48 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 750 W versus 220 W
• Slot Width: OAM Module versus Dual-slot
• Power Connectors: None versus 1x 16-pin
• Suggested PSU: 1150 W versus 550 W
• Bus Interface: PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x16
• Display Outputs: No outputs versus 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
• DirectX: N/A versus 12 Ultimate (12_2)
• OpenGL: N/A versus 4.6
• Vulkan: N/A versus 1.4
• Dimensions: Not listed versus 267 mm x 112 mm x 42 mm
• Release Date: 2023-12-05 versus 2024-01-16
• Predecessor: Radeon Instinct versus GeForce 30
• Successor: Not listed versus GeForce 50
• Launch MSRP: Not listed versus 599 USD

Where Each One Wins

The MI308X wins decisively on compute capacity. Its 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 throughput, combined with 192 GB of HBM3 memory and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth, positions it for large-scale data center workloads such as AI training, scientific simulation, and high-performance computing. The 8192-bit memory bus and OAM form factor indicate a server-oriented design. The absence of display outputs and graphics APIs confirms that this card is not intended for interactive use. The 750 W TDP and 1150 W suggested PSU reflect its enterprise power envelope.

The RTX 4070 SUPER wins on graphics functionality and efficiency. Its 56 RT cores and 224 tensor cores enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI features, while its 198.0 GPixel/s pixel rate and 554.4 GTexel/s texture rate support traditional rendering. The card includes full DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support, along with three DisplayPort outputs and one HDMI output. Its 220 W TDP and 550 W suggested PSU make it suitable for standard desktop systems. The recorded benchmark scores, including 29,995 in Passmark G3D and 205,624 in Geekbench Vulkan, demonstrate solid graphics performance across multiple test suites.

The Verdict

The data separates these two cards into distinct categories. The AMD Instinct MI308X is a compute accelerator with no graphics output, no API support, and no benchmark scores. It offers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, 192 GB of HBM3 memory, and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. This card is for installations where raw floating-point throughput and massive memory capacity are the only metrics that matter. The 50th percentile ranking reflects its position among all GPUs in the database, but the absence of recorded performance tests means its practical capabilities must be inferred from specifications.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER is a consumer graphics card with full display output, modern API support, and a complete benchmark profile. Its 83rd percentile ranking places it above the majority of GPUs in the database. The average benchmark score of 43,223 puts it within 1% of the RTX 4090 Mobile, and it is effectively tied with the Quadro M6000 24 GB (0.1% lower) and RTX 5050 Mobile (0.1% lower). The RTX 4070 SUPER delivers 35.48 TFLOPS FP32, 12 GB of GDDR6X memory, and 504.2 GB/s bandwidth, all within a 220 W power envelope. Its launch MSRP was 599 USD.

For users requiring graphics output, API compatibility, or a card that fits into a desktop chassis, the RTX 4070 SUPER is the only option between these two. For users running compute workloads that can leverage 192 GB of memory and over 10 TB/s of bandwidth, the MI308X provides specifications that no consumer card can approach. The choice depends entirely on the workload: the RTX 4070 SUPER serves interactive graphics and general-purpose computing, while the MI308X serves specialized data center compute tasks. The database shows no overlap in their intended use cases, and the specification differences reinforce this separation.