AMD Instinct MI455X vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct benchmark scores for either the AMD Instinct MI455X or the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103. Both entries show an average benchmark score of 0 and an empty head-to-head benchmark array. This means the quantitative comparison must rely entirely on the architectural and specification data recorded for each part.

Looking at the raw compute metrics, the AMD Instinct MI455X delivers 157.3 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103 delivers 29.15 TFLOPS. That places the AMD part at 5.4 times the FP32 rate of the NVIDIA part. The FP16 figures mirror the FP32 rates exactly for both cards, with each showing a 1:1 ratio, so the relative gap remains identical in half-precision workloads.

The texture rate tells a similar story. The MI455X reaches 2,457.6 GTexel/s, while the RTX 4070 AD103 reaches 455.4 GTexel/s. The AMD part is 5.4 times faster in texture fill as well. Pixel rate, however, is a different matter. The MI455X records 0 MPixel/s because it has no ROPs, whereas the RTX 4070 AD103 manages 158.4 GPixel/s with its 64 ROPs. This is a fundamental split: the Instinct card is built for compute and memory throughput, not rasterization output.

Memory bandwidth amplifies the compute gap. The MI455X uses 432 GB of HBM4 across a 24,576-bit bus to reach 23.3 TB/s. The RTX 4070 AD103 uses 12 GB of GDDR6X across a 192-bit bus to reach 504.2 GB/s. The AMD card has 36 times the memory capacity and 46.2 times the bandwidth. The bus width difference is equally stark, with the MI455X using 128 times the interface width.

Clock speeds do not favor the larger card. The MI455X runs at a 1000 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost, while the RTX 4070 AD103 runs at 1920 MHz base and 2475 MHz boost. The NVIDIA part has a higher base clock by 920 MHz and a higher boost clock by 75 MHz. The MI455X makes up for its lower clocks through sheer scale: 32,768 shading units versus 5,888, a 5.6 times difference.

The transistor counts reflect the manufacturing approach. The MI455X integrates 320,000 million transistors on a 2990 mm² die using a 2 nm TSMC process, giving a density of 107.0M transistors per mm². The RTX 4070 AD103 integrates 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die using a 5 nm TSMC process, giving a density of 121.1M transistors per mm². The NVIDIA chip is denser per area, but the AMD chip is far larger overall.

The Verdict

The data describes two devices with almost no functional overlap. The AMD Instinct MI455X is a compute accelerator with no display outputs, no ROPs, and no graphics API support (DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan are all listed as N/A). It draws 2300 W, requires a 2700 W suggested power supply, and mounts as an EAM Module with no power connectors. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103 is a conventional graphics card with a dual-slot cooler, a 16-pin power connector, a 550 W suggested PSU, and full API support including DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. It also carries display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

For any workload that requires rendering to a screen, running graphics APIs, or rasterization, the RTX 4070 AD103 is the only option with the necessary hardware. Its 64 ROPs and 158.4 GPixel/s pixel rate are present specifically for that role. The MI455X cannot output video at all.

For compute-heavy, headless workloads such as large-scale matrix operations or memory-bound data processing, the MI455X offers 157.3 TFLOPS FP32, 23.3 TB/s of memory bandwidth, and 432 GB of capacity. These are not numbers the RTX 4070 AD103 can approach, as its 29.15 TFLOPS and 504.2 GB/s sit at 18.5% and 2.2% of the AMD part's respective figures.

The percentile ranking versus all GPUs is identical for both at 50, which suggests the database does not differentiate them in overall standing, likely because no benchmark scores are recorded. The release dates are also far apart: the RTX 4070 AD103 launched on 2024-02-29 and is marked end-of-life, while the MI455X is dated 2026-07-22 with no production status recorded. The NVIDIA card's predecessor is GeForce 30 and its successor is GeForce 50. The AMD card's predecessor is Radeon Instinct, with no successor listed.

Architecture Differences

The MI455X uses the CDNA 5.0 architecture, specifically the MI450 256CU chip. It is part of the Instinct (MIx) generation. The RTX 4070 AD103 uses the Ada Lovelace architecture on the AD103 chip, part of the GeForce 40-series. These are different design philosophies: CDNA is AMD's compute-focused line, while Ada Lovelace is a graphics architecture with dedicated ray tracing and tensor hardware.

The RTX 4070 AD103 has 46 RT cores and 184 tensor cores. The MI455X records null values for both RT cores and tensor cores, meaning those units are either absent or not applicable to its design. The MI455X has 1,024 TMUs and 0 ROPs, while the RTX 4070 AD103 has 184 TMUs and 64 ROPs.

Memory technology differs completely. The MI455X uses HBM4, which is a stacked, high-bandwidth memory type suited for accelerator workloads. The RTX 4070 AD103 uses GDDR6X, a graphics-oriented memory type. The MI455X's memory clock is listed as 1900 MHz with 7.6 Gbps effective, while the RTX 4070 AD103's memory clock is 1313 MHz with 21 Gbps effective. The NVIDIA card has a higher effective data rate per pin, but the AMD card's enormous bus width (24,576 bit versus 192 bit) dominates total bandwidth.

The process nodes differ as well. The MI455X is built on a 2 nm TSMC process, while the RTX 4070 AD103 is built on a 5 nm TSMC process. The foundry is the same, but the node generation is newer for the AMD part. Transistor density is higher on the NVIDIA chip (121.1M per mm² versus 107.0M per mm²), which indicates the 5 nm node packs transistors more tightly in this implementation, but the AMD die is so much larger that its total transistor count is 7 times greater.

The power delivery systems are dissimilar. The MI455X has no power connectors and draws 2300 W, suggesting it receives power through the EAM Module socket itself. The RTX 4070 AD103 uses a single 16-pin connector and draws 200 W. The suggested PSU ratings reflect this: 2700 W for the AMD card, 550 W for the NVIDIA card.

The bus interface also differs by one generation. The MI455X uses PCIe 6.0 x16, while the RTX 4070 AD103 uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Both are x16 electrically, but the protocol version is newer on the AMD side.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher FP32 compute?

A: The AMD Instinct MI455X records 157.3 TFLOPS, which is 5.4 times the 29.15 TFLOPS of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103.

Q: Does the MI455X support display output?

A: No. The MI455X lists "No outputs" for display connections and has 0 ROPs with 0 MPixel/s pixel rate. The RTX 4070 AD103 has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Q: What memory configurations do the two cards use?

A: The MI455X uses 432 GB of HBM4 on a 24,576-bit bus with 23.3 TB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4070 AD103 uses 12 GB of GDDR6X on a 192-bit bus with 504.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card supports DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan?

A: Only the RTX 4070 AD103. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI455X lists N/A for all three APIs.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The MI455X has a TDP of 2300 W and a suggested PSU of 2700 W, with no power connectors (power comes through the EAM Module). The RTX 4070 AD103 has a TDP of 200 W, a suggested PSU of 550 W, and uses 1x 16-pin power connector.

Q: Which card has ray tracing and tensor cores?

A: The RTX 4070 AD103 has 46 RT cores and 184 tensor cores. The MI455X records null values for both, indicating no such dedicated units.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI455X wins decisively in pure compute throughput. Its FP32 rate of 157.3 TFLOPS is 5.4 times higher than the RTX 4070 AD103. Its FP16 rate matches its FP32 rate at 157.3 TFLOPS, so half-precision workloads see the same advantage. Texture rate follows the same pattern at 2,457.6 GTexel/s versus 455.4 GTexel/s.

The MI455X also wins in memory capacity and bandwidth. Its 432 GB of HBM4 is 36 times the 12 GB of GDDR6X on the NVIDIA card. Its 23.3 TB/s bandwidth is 46.2 times the 504.2 GB/s of the RTX 4070 AD103. For workloads that stream large datasets or require enormous working sets, this is the dominant factor.

The RTX 4070 AD103 wins in rasterization output. Its 158.4 GPixel/s pixel rate is fully functional, while the MI455X manages 0 MPixel/s due to having no ROPs. This makes the NVIDIA card the only choice for any graphics rendering pipeline that produces pixels.

The RTX 4070 AD103 wins in clock speeds. Its 1920 MHz base and 2475 MHz boost are higher than the MI455X's 1000 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost. For latency-sensitive tasks that do not scale with core count, the higher clocks may provide an advantage.

The RTX 4070 AD103 wins in API compatibility. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI455X supports none of these. Software written for those APIs will only run on the NVIDIA card.

The RTX 4070 AD103 wins in practical power delivery. Its 200 W TDP and 550 W suggested PSU are far below the MI455X's 2300 W TDP and 2700 W suggested PSU. The NVIDIA card uses a standard 1x 16-pin connector and fits in a dual-slot form factor, whereas the MI455X uses an EAM Module with no power connectors.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every recorded specification field.

| Field | AMD Instinct MI455X | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103 |

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

| Architecture | CDNA 5.0 | Ada Lovelace |

| Chip | MI450 256CU | AD103 |

| Process node | 2 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 320,000 million | 45,900 million |

| Die size | 2990 mm² | 379 mm² |

| Transistor density | 107.0M / mm² | 121.1M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1000 MHz | 1920 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2400 MHz | 2475 MHz |

| Memory clock | 1900 MHz, 7.6 Gbps effective | 1313 MHz, 21 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 432 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory type | HBM4 | GDDR6X |

| Memory bus | 24,576 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 23.3 TB/s | 504.2 GB/s |

| Shading units | 32,768 | 5,888 |

| TMUs | 1,024 | 184 |

| ROPs | 0 | 64 |

| RT cores | N/A (null) | 46 |

| Tensor cores | N/A (null) | 184 |

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

| Texture rate | 2,457.6 GTexel/s | 455.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 157.3 TFLOPS | 29.15 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 157.3 TFLOPS (1:1) | 29.15 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 2300 W | 200 W |

| Slot width | EAM Module | Dual-slot |

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

| Suggested PSU | 2700 W | 550 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 6.0 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 |

| Dimensions | Not recorded | 240 mm x 110 mm x 40 mm |

| Release date | 2026-07-22 | 2024-02-29 |

| Production status | Not recorded | End-of-life |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | GeForce 30 |

| Successor | None recorded | GeForce 50 |

| Launch MSRP | None recorded | 599 USD |