AMD Instinct MI350X vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the AMD Instinct MI350X and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070. The MI350X has no benchmark entries, an average benchmark score of 0, and a percentile rank of 50 among all GPUs. The RTX 4070, by contrast, has ten recorded benchmark scores, an average benchmark score of 37648, and a percentile rank of 81. This means the RTX 4070 outperforms 81 percent of all GPUs in the database, while the MI350X sits at the median with no performance data recorded.

The RTX 4070 delivers a Geekbench OpenCL score of 154858 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 174152. Its PassMark G3D score is 26927, with a PassMark GPU Compute score of 14720. In legacy DirectX tests, it scores 320 in PassMark DirectX 9, 244 in DirectX 11, 139 in DirectX 10, and 103 in DirectX 12. The PassMark G2D score is 1164. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 3854.

The nearest rivals to the RTX 4070 in the database include the NVIDIA Tesla P4 at 37628 average score, which is 0.1 percent ahead of the RTX 4070, and the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 at 37507, which is 0.4 percent behind. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile scores 38135, 1.3 percent ahead, and the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 scores 37157, 1.3 percent behind. These deltas show the RTX 4070 sits in a tight cluster of comparable performers, with the RTX 4080 Mobile being the only rival in the set that exceeds it by more than one percent.

Since the MI350X has no benchmark results, no comparative performance statements can be made from the database regarding its wins or losses. The RTX 4070's benchmark presence is the only measurable performance data available for this pairing. The MI350X's percentile rank of 50 with an average score of 0 indicates it is unranked by actual workload performance, whereas the RTX 4070 has substantial measured data across multiple test suites.

Architecture Differences

The two accelerators diverge fundamentally in their design targets. The AMD Instinct MI350X uses the CDNA 4.0 architecture, designed for compute acceleration, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 uses the Ada Lovelace architecture, built for graphics and general-purpose computing. The MI350X is manufactured on a 3 nm process at TSMC, while the RTX 4070 uses a 5 nm process, also at TSMC.

The chip scale difference is enormous. The MI350X uses the MI350 256CU chip with 185,000 million transistors on a die size of 2380 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 77.7 million per mm². The RTX 4070 uses the AD104 chip with 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 121.8 million per mm². The MI350X has over five times the transistor count and a die over eight times larger, but the RTX 4070 packs transistors more densely.

Memory configurations reflect their distinct roles. The MI350X carries 288 GB of HBM3e memory on a 8192-bit bus, delivering 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 4070 has 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus, with 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The MI350X offers 24 times the capacity and over 16 times the bandwidth.

The compute resources differ by large margins. The MI350X has 16384 shading units and 1024 texture mapping units, with no ROPs. The RTX 4070 has 5888 shading units, 184 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The MI350X reports 0 MPixel/s pixel rate and 2,252.8 GTexel/s texture rate. The RTX 4070 reports 158.4 GPixel/s and 455.4 GTexel/s. Floating-point throughput shows the MI350X at 72.09 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16, while the RTX 4070 delivers 29.15 TFLOPS for both. The MI350X has no ray tracing cores or tensor cores listed, while the RTX 4070 has 46 RT cores and 184 tensor cores.

Clock behavior also diverges. The MI350X has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz, with memory at 2000 MHz or 8 Gbps effective. The RTX 4070 has a base clock of 1920 MHz and a boost of 2475 MHz, with memory at 1313 MHz or 21 Gbps effective. The RTX 4070 runs at higher clocks despite its smaller die, while the MI350X relies on massive parallelism and memory bandwidth.

Power and physical design separate them further. The MI350X has a TDP of 1000 W and a suggested PSU of 1400 W, uses an OAM module slot width, has no power connectors listed, and no display outputs. The RTX 4070 has a TDP of 200 W, a suggested PSU of 550 W, is dual-slot, uses one 16-pin power connector, and provides 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The MI350X measures 102 mm in length and 165 mm in width, while the RTX 4070 measures 240 mm in length, 110 mm in height, and 40 mm in width.

API support also differs completely. The MI350X lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. The RTX 4070 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI350X uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, while the RTX 4070 uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350X offers 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth from HBM3e memory on an 8192-bit bus, versus 504.2 GB/s from GDDR6X on a 192-bit bus for the RTX 4070.

Q: What is the RTX 4070's standing among all GPUs in the database?

A: The RTX 4070 ranks in the 81st percentile with an average benchmark score of 37648, and its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Tesla P4, is only 0.1 percent ahead.

Q: Does the MI350X support graphics APIs?

A: The MI350X lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, and has no display outputs. The RTX 4070 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: How do the transistor counts compare?

A: The MI350X contains 185,000 million transistors on a 2380 mm² die, while the RTX 4070 contains 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die.

Q: What is the power requirement for each card?

A: The MI350X has a 1000 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The RTX 4070 has a 200 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 550 W.

Q: What is the RTX 4070's launch MSRP?

A: The RTX 4070 had a launch MSRP of 599 USD. The MI350X has no launch MSRP recorded.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Instinct MI350X | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 |

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

| Architecture | CDNA 4.0 | Ada Lovelace |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 185,000 million | 35,800 million |

| Die Size | 2380 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 77.7M / mm² | 121.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 1920 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2200 MHz | 2475 MHz |

| Memory Size | 288 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM3e | GDDR6X |

| Memory Bus Width | 8192 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 8.19 TB/s | 504.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 16384 | 5888 |

| TMUs | 1024 | 184 |

| ROPs | 0 | 64 |

| RT Cores | None listed | 46 |

| Tensor Cores | None listed | 184 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 158.4 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 2,252.8 GTexel/s | 455.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 72.09 TFLOPS | 29.15 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 72.09 TFLOPS (1:1) | 29.15 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 1000 W | 200 W |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 1400 W | 550 W |

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

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

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

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |

| Length | 102 mm | 240 mm |

| Width | 165 mm | 40 mm |

| Height | Not listed | 110 mm |

| Release Date | 2025-06-11 | 2023-04-11 |

| Production Status | Not listed | End-of-life |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | GeForce 30 |

| Successor | Not listed | GeForce 50 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 0 | 37648 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 50 | 81 |

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI350X wins decisively in raw compute capacity and memory resources. Its 72.09 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is 2.47 times the RTX 4070's 29.15 TFLOPS. The 288 GB memory capacity dwarfs the 12 GB on the RTX 4070, and the 8.19 TB/s bandwidth exceeds the RTX 4070's 504.2 GB/s by a factor of 16.2. The 8192-bit bus width provides a memory path that the RTX 4070's 192-bit bus cannot approach. The 16384 shading units and 1024 TMUs give the MI350X a massive parallel execution resource. Its 3 nm process node and 185,000 million transistors indicate a design focused on maximum compute throughput rather than efficiency. The MI350X also uses the newer PCIe 5.0 x16 interface versus the RTX 4070's PCIe 4.0 x16.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 wins in graphics functionality and practical usability. It is the only one of the two with display outputs, supporting 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI350X lists N/A for all three APIs. The RTX 4070 has 46 RT cores and 184 tensor cores, enabling ray tracing and AI acceleration workloads that the MI350X does not list. Its 64 ROPs and 158.4 GPixel/s pixel rate provide rasterization capabilities absent from the MI350X, which reports 0 ROPs and 0 MPixel/s.

The RTX 4070 wins on clock speed and transistor density. Its 2475 MHz boost clock exceeds the MI350X's 2200 MHz, and its base clock of 1920 MHz is nearly double the MI350X's 1000 MHz. The RTX 4070's 121.8M transistors per mm² density exceeds the MI350X's 77.7M per mm², indicating a more compact design. The RTX 4070 also wins on power efficiency, with a 200 W TDP versus the MI350X's 1000 W, and a suggested PSU of 550 W versus 1400 W.

The RTX 4070 is the only one with recorded benchmark data. Its average benchmark score of 37648 and 81st percentile ranking place it among the top GPUs in the database. The MI350X has no benchmarks recorded, so its real-world performance cannot be assessed from the data. The RTX 4070 also has a defined production status of end-of-life, a release date of 2023-04-11, and a successor in the GeForce 50 series. The MI350X has a release date of 2025-06-11, a predecessor in the Radeon Instinct line, and no recorded successor.

The use-case split is clear from the specifications. The MI350X targets large-scale compute workloads requiring massive memory capacity and bandwidth, with no graphics output. The RTX 4070 targets graphics rendering, ray tracing, and general compute with display connectivity and full graphics API support. The MI350X's higher FP32 and FP16 throughput suits data-parallel compute, while the RTX 4070's RT cores, tensor cores, and ROPs suit gaming and graphics-adjacent workloads. The RTX 4070's 12 GB memory and 504.2 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for graphics tasks, while the MI350X's 288 GB and 8.19 TB/s serve memory-intensive computation. The MI350X's 1000 W TDP and OAM module form factor indicate a datacenter installation profile, whereas the RTX 4070's dual-slot design and display outputs indicate a workstation or consumer desktop role.