AMD Instinct MI325X vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for these two accelerators shows a fundamental divide: one is an enterprise compute module with zero benchmark entries, the other is a consumer graphics card with a full suite of measured scores. The AMD Instinct MI325X carries an average benchmark score of zero and a percentile rank of 50, meaning it sits at the median of the database purely by default, as no workloads have been recorded against it. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti, by contrast, holds a percentile rank of 84 and an average benchmark score of 44,795 across ten distinct tests.

The RTX 4070 Ti's strongest recorded result arrives in Geekbench Vulkan, where it posts 213,808 points. Its OpenCL result follows closely at 176,953 points. In Passmark's suite, the G3D score reaches 31,624, while the GPU compute test produces 18,396 points. The 2D test logs 1,200 points. Legacy DirectX tests show 352 in DirectX 9, 288 in DirectX 11, 187 in DirectX 10, and 116 in DirectX 12. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test yields 5,024 points. These figures establish a consistent baseline for a high-end consumer GPU.

The nearest rivals in the database clarify the RTX 4070 Ti's position. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile averages 45,152 points, which is 0.8% higher. The AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT averages 45,384 points, 1.3% higher. The Intel Arc A730M averages 45,592 points, 1.7% higher. The NVIDIA RTX A6000 averages 44,075 points, which is 1.6% lower. The RTX 4070 Ti therefore sits within a tight 3.3% band of these four rivals, slightly below three of them and slightly above one. The MI325X has no comparable benchmark entries, so no head-to-head delta can be computed.

The absence of recorded benchmarks for the MI325X means the database cannot substantiate any win for it in measured workloads. The wins column shows zero for the MI325X and zero for the RTX 4070 Ti in head-to-head comparisons, reflecting the lack of shared test data. What the data does show is the RTX 4070 Ti's measured performance profile across modern and legacy APIs, while the MI325X remains a specification-only entry.

Architecture Differences

The two chips share a fabrication node: both use TSMC's 5 nm process. Beyond that, the designs diverge completely. The MI325X uses the Aqua Vanjaram die with CDNA 3.0 architecture, part of AMD's Instinct MIx generation. The RTX 4070 Ti uses the AD104 die with Ada Lovelace architecture, part of NVIDIA's GeForce 40 series.

Transistor counts reveal the scale difference. The MI325X integrates 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, yielding a density of 150.4 million transistors per mm². The RTX 4070 Ti integrates 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, with a density of 121.8 million per mm². The MI325X die is more than three times larger in area and carries over four times the transistor count.

Memory configurations differ in kind, not just capacity. The MI325X uses 256 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 6.14 TB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 4070 Ti uses 12 GB of GDDR6X on a 192-bit bus, delivering 504.2 GB/s. The bandwidth gap is roughly twelvefold, and the memory clock figures reflect the different technologies: the MI325X runs its memory at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective), while the RTX 4070 Ti runs at 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective). The wider bus on the MI325X is the dominant factor.

Compute resources follow the same pattern. The MI325X has 19,456 shading units and 1,216 texture mapping units, with a texture rate of 2,553.6 GTexel/s. It has zero ROPs and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, which is consistent with a compute-focused module that has no display outputs. The RTX 4070 Ti has 7,680 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 80 ROPs, with a texture rate of 626.4 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 208.8 GPixel/s. The MI325X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16 (1:1 ratio). The RTX 4070 Ti delivers 40.09 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16 (1:1 ratio). The MI325X's raw floating-point throughput is roughly double.

Feature sets diverge sharply. The RTX 4070 Ti includes 60 ray tracing cores and 240 tensor cores, supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and provides display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The MI325X lists no RT cores, no tensor cores, no API support (DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan all read N/A), and no display outputs. The MI325X is a PCIe 5.0 x16 card; the RTX 4070 Ti uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

Power and physical design underline the different deployment targets. The MI325X has a 1000 W TDP, uses an OAM Module slot width, has no power connectors on the card, and recommends a 1400 W power supply. The RTX 4070 Ti has a 285 W TDP, is dual-slot, uses a single 16-pin connector, and recommends a 600 W PSU. The RTX 4070 Ti measures 285 mm in length, 112 mm in height, and 42 mm in width. The MI325X has no listed dimensions.

Release timing and lifecycle status differ. The MI325X launched on 2024-10-09 and has no production status recorded. The RTX 4070 Ti launched on 2023-01-02, is marked end-of-life, and has a successor in the GeForce 50 series. The MI325X lists Radeon Instinct as its predecessor and has no successor.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split by intended use. The RTX 4070 Ti is the only one of the two with measured performance in the database. Its percentile rank of 84 places it above the majority of recorded GPUs, and its average score of 44,795 positions it within 1.7% of three of its nearest rivals and 1.6% above one. For any workload that relies on consumer graphics APIs, ray tracing, tensor operations, or display output, the RTX 4070 Ti is the only option with recorded evidence of function.

The MI325X offers no benchmark scores, no API support, no display outputs, and no consumer-oriented features. Its specifications indicate a compute module aimed at server or accelerator workloads: 256 GB of HBM3e, 6.14 TB/s bandwidth, 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, and a 1000 W TDP. The data cannot confirm performance in any application because no tests are recorded.

The RTX 4070 Ti is the appropriate choice for graphics rendering, gaming, and local compute tasks that use DirectX or Vulkan. The MI325X is the appropriate choice for large-memory compute deployments where the 256 GB capacity and 6.14 TB/s bandwidth are the primary requirements, provided the software stack does not depend on the graphics APIs the module lacks.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher percentile rank in the database?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti holds a percentile rank of 84, while the AMD Instinct MI325X holds a percentile rank of 50.

Q: What is the memory capacity and bandwidth of each card?

A: The MI325X has 256 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus with 6.14 TB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4070 Ti has 12 GB of GDDR6X on a 192-bit bus with 504.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the MI325X support DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan?

A: No. The recorded data lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A for the MI325X. The RTX 4070 Ti supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the FP32 throughput of each accelerator?

A: The MI325X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS in FP32, while the RTX 4070 Ti delivers 40.09 TFLOPS in FP32. Both run FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with the same figures.

Q: What is the TDP and recommended power supply for each?

A: The MI325X has a 1000 W TDP and recommends a 1400 W power supply. The RTX 4070 Ti has a 285 W TDP and recommends a 600 W power supply.

Q: Which card has ray tracing and tensor cores?

A: The RTX 4070 Ti has 60 ray tracing cores and 240 tensor cores. The MI325X lists no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4070 Ti wins in every category where measured data exists. Its ten benchmark scores cover DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12, OpenCL, Vulkan, 2D, 3D, and compute workloads. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result of 5,024 points and the Passmark G3D score of 31,624 establish a concrete performance baseline. The Geekbench Vulkan score of 213,808 is the highest single recorded result for either card. The RTX 4070 Ti also wins on feature availability: it provides display outputs, ray tracing cores, tensor cores, and full API support, while the MI325X provides none of these.

The MI325X wins on raw specifications. Its FP32 throughput of 81.72 TFLOPS is more than double the RTX 4070 Ti's 40.09 TFLOPS. Its 256 GB memory capacity is over twenty times larger. Its 6.14 TB/s bandwidth is roughly twelve times higher. Its transistor count of 153,000 million is over four times the RTX 4070 Ti's 35,800 million. These figures suggest a decisive advantage in memory-bound compute workloads, though no benchmark data confirms it.

The RTX 4070 Ti also wins on power efficiency in the recorded specifications. It delivers 40.09 TFLOPS at 285 W, while the MI325X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS at 1000 W. Per watt, the RTX 4070 Ti produces roughly 0.14 TFLOPS/W, while the MI325X produces roughly 0.08 TFLOPS/W. The RTX 4070 Ti also fits in a dual-slot consumer chassis with a 600 W PSU recommendation, whereas the MI325X requires an OAM module form factor and a 1400 W PSU.

The MI325X wins on memory capacity and bus width by an overwhelming margin, which matters for large model inference or data processing workloads that must keep entire datasets resident. The RTX 4070 Ti wins on software compatibility, measured performance, and deployment flexibility. Neither card substitutes for the other; the data indicates two different product categories sharing a node process but little else.