AMD Instinct MI325X vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Max-Q Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Instinct MI325X and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Max-Q. Both products sit at the 50th percentile in the database, though their average benchmark scores are both recorded as zero, indicating that no comparable workload measurements have been logged for either part. Without benchmark entries, the comparison must rely entirely on the architecture and specification fields present in the database.

The most decisive numerical gap appears in compute throughput. The AMD Instinct MI325X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 and FP16 (1:1), while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Max-Q delivers 11.34 TFLOPS in both precisions. That places the Instinct part 7.2 times higher in raw FP32 throughput, a difference of 70.38 TFLOPS. The texture rate shows a similar pattern: the AMD part reaches 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 177.1 GTexel/s for the NVIDIA part, a 14.4x advantage. Pixel rate moves in the opposite direction, with the NVIDIA part at 59.04 GPixel/s and the AMD part at 0 MPixel/s, since the Instinct accelerator has no ROPs.

Memory capacity and bandwidth heavily favor the AMD part. The Instinct MI325X carries 256 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus, yielding 6.14 TB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 4070 Max-Q uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 256.0 GB/s. The bandwidth ratio is 24x in favor of the AMD part, and capacity differs by 32x. The transistor counts also diverge: 153,000 million for the AMD chip versus 22,900 million for the NVIDIA chip, a 6.7x difference. Die size is larger as well, 1017 mm² versus 188 mm², though the AMD part has a higher transistor density at 150.4M / mm² versus 121.8M / mm².

Clocks do not favor the larger part. The Instinct MI325X runs at a 1000 MHz base and 2100 MHz boost. The RTX 4070 Max-Q runs at 735 MHz base and 1230 MHz boost. The AMD part boosts 870 MHz higher, but its memory clock is lower in effective terms: 6 Gbps effective versus 16 Gbps effective for the NVIDIA part. The NVIDIA part also has a dedicated pixel rate, 59.04 GPixel/s, while the AMD part records 0 MPixel/s due to having zero ROPs.

Power draw is a major separator. The AMD Instinct MI325X lists a TDP of 1000 W with a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The RTX 4070 Max-Q lists a TDP of 35 W and no suggested PSU. That is a 965 W difference, making the NVIDIA part roughly 28.6x more power-efficient in terms of TDP per FP32 TFLOPS (3.09 W per TFLOPS versus 12.24 W per TFLOPS). Neither part uses external power connectors according to the database, and both are listed with "None" for power connectors.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI325X wins decisively in compute-heavy workloads that scale with raw FP32 or FP16 throughput. Its 81.72 TFLOPS in both precisions makes it suitable for dense matrix operations, large-scale inference, and scientific computing where memory bandwidth is the bottleneck. The 256 GB HBM3e pool with 6.14 TB/s bandwidth provides an enormous working set for models or datasets that would not fit in the 8 GB frame buffer of the RTX 4070 Max-Q. The 8192-bit bus width is 64x wider than the NVIDIA part's 128-bit bus, which directly supports high-bandwidth access patterns common in HPC and AI training.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Max-Q wins in any scenario that requires rasterization or display output. It has 48 ROPs and a pixel rate of 59.04 GPixel/s, while the AMD part has zero ROPs and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s. The RTX part also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the AMD part lists N/A for all three APIs. The NVIDIA part has 36 RT cores and 144 tensor cores, features absent from the AMD part's specification fields. For mobile or portable use, the 35 W TDP of the RTX 4070 Max-Q is practical, while the 1000 W TDP of the Instinct part requires a 1400 W suggested PSU and an OAM module slot.

The RTX 4070 Max-Q also wins on memory clock speed: 16 Gbps effective versus 6 Gbps effective for the AMD part. That higher per-pin speed compensates for the narrower bus in some latency-sensitive tasks, though the total bandwidth remains far lower. The NVIDIA part has a smaller die (188 mm² versus 1017 mm²) and fewer transistors (22,900 million versus 153,000 million), which correlates with lower power draw and simpler cooling requirements. The RTX part uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the AMD part uses PCIe 5.0 x16, giving the AMD part a newer and wider host interface.

The Verdict

The data indicates that these two products serve entirely different purposes. The AMD Instinct MI325X is a compute accelerator with no display outputs, no ROPs, and no graphics API support. Its 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32/FP16 and 256 GB HBM3e make it a server-class part for data center workloads. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Max-Q is a mobile graphics processor with 59.04 GPixel/s pixel throughput, 36 RT cores, 144 tensor cores, and full DirectX 12 Ultimate support, designed for laptops with a 35 W power envelope.

A builder choosing for an AI training node or scientific simulation cluster should pick the AMD Instinct MI325X based on its 6.14 TB/s memory bandwidth and 256 GB capacity. A builder choosing for a portable gaming or content creation laptop should pick the NVIDIA RTX 4070 Max-Q based on its rasterization capability, API support, and 35 W TDP. The 1000 W TDP of the AMD part makes it unsuitable for any desktop or mobile system without a 1400 W PSU and OAM module infrastructure.

The RTX 4070 Max-Q is the only part with a production status of "Active" in the database; the AMD part has a null production status. The NVIDIA part also has a successor listed (GeForce 50 Mobile), while the AMD part has no successor. Release dates differ by about nine months: the NVIDIA part launched on 2023-01-02, and the AMD part on 2024-10-09.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 throughput?

A: The AMD Instinct MI325X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32, which is 7.2 times higher than the 11.34 TFLOPS of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Max-Q.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each part provide?

A: The AMD Instinct MI325X provides 6.14 TB/s from 256 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Max-Q provides 256.0 GB/s from 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: Can the AMD Instinct MI325X output video to a display?

A: No. The database lists display outputs as "No outputs" for the AMD part, and its pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s with zero ROPs.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The AMD Instinct MI325X has a TDP of 1000 W with a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Max-Q has a TDP of 35 W and no suggested PSU listed.

Q: Does the NVIDIA part support DirectX?

A: Yes, the RTX 4070 Max-Q supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD part lists N/A for all three APIs.

Q: Which part has more shading units?

A: The AMD Instinct MI325X has 19,456 shading units, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Max-Q has 4,608 shading units.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Instinct MI325X uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture on the Aqua Vanjaram chip, belonging to the Instinct (MIx) generation. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Max-Q uses the Ada Lovelace architecture on the AD106 chip, belonging to the GeForce 40 Mobile generation. Both are fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process, but the AMD chip has 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, while the NVIDIA chip has 22,900 million transistors on a 188 mm² die. Transistor density favors the AMD part at 150.4M / mm² versus 121.8M / mm².

The AMD part has no RT cores, no tensor cores, and no ROPs. The NVIDIA part has 36 RT cores, 144 tensor cores, and 48 ROPs. The AMD part uses HBM3e memory, while the NVIDIA part uses GDDR6. The AMD part has 1,216 TMUs versus 144 TMUs for the NVIDIA part. The AMD part has 19,456 shading units versus 4,608 for the NVIDIA part. The AMD part has no display outputs, while the NVIDIA part lists "Portable Device Dependent" outputs. The AMD part uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the NVIDIA part uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The AMD part is an OAM Module with no power connectors, while the NVIDIA part is IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors.

FP16 performance is identical to FP32 for both parts at a 1:1 ratio, so neither has dedicated half-rate FP16 acceleration in the recorded data. The AMD part has no API support listed, while the NVIDIA part has full support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD part has a predecessor of Radeon Instinct, while the NVIDIA part has a predecessor of GeForce 30 Mobile and a successor of GeForce 50 Mobile.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Instinct MI325X | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Max-Q |

|-------|---------------------|-------------------------------|

| Architecture | CDNA 3.0 | Ada Lovelace |

| Chip | Aqua Vanjaram | AD106 |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | 22,900 million |

| Die Size | 1017 mm² | 188 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 150.4M / mm² | 121.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 735 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2100 MHz | 1230 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1500 MHz, 6 Gbps effective | 2000 MHz, 16 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 256 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM3e | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 8192 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 6.14 TB/s | 256.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 19,456 | 4,608 |

| TMUs | 1,216 | 144 |

| ROPs | 0 | 48 |

| RT Cores | None | 36 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 144 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 59.04 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 2,553.6 GTexel/s | 177.1 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 81.72 TFLOPS | 11.34 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 81.72 TFLOPS (1:1) | 11.34 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 1000 W | 35 W |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | IGP |

| Suggested PSU | 1400 W | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | N/A | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |

| Production Status | None | Active |

| Release Date | 2024-10-09 | 2023-01-02 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | GeForce 30 Mobile |

| Successor | None | GeForce 50 Mobile |