AMD Radeon HD 8970M vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded database results draw an unusually clear line between these two mobile-era graphics processors. The AMD Radeon HD 8970M and the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 are separated by roughly five years of engineering, and the benchmark data reflects that gap in dramatic fashion. In the single shared OpenCL test, the Quadro RTX 4000 posts a score of 74540 against the HD 8970M’s 21237, a 71.5% advantage for NVIDIA. That is not a marginal lead; it is a generational chasm.

For anyone selecting a GPU for compute-heavy workloads, OpenCL acceleration, or modern API support, the Quadro RTX 4000 is the only rational choice from this data. It also brings dedicated ray tracing cores and tensor cores, features the AMD part lacks entirely. The HD 8970M, meanwhile, sits at the end of its production life with a 66th percentile ranking among all GPUs, while the Quadro RTX 4000 holds a 61st percentile. The AMD card’s percentile is actually higher, but that reflects its placement against a wider field of older and weaker parts; against the Quadro RTX 4000 specifically, it loses the only head-to-head measurement available.

The HD 8970M is best reserved for legacy systems, particularly portable workstations from the 2013 era that require a drop-in MXM module replacement. Its 100 W TDP and MXM form factor make it a straightforward fit for such machines. The Quadro RTX 4000, by contrast, is a single-slot desktop workstation card with a 160 W TDP, an 8-pin power connector, and a suggested 450 W power supply. It targets modern CAD, rendering, and compute environments that demand DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and substantial memory bandwidth.

The verdict, strictly from the data: the Quadro RTX 4000 wins outright for contemporary workloads, while the HD 8970M only makes sense for vintage hardware maintenance or tasks so old that its GCN 1.0 feature set remains sufficient.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark record contains only one direct comparison between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. The Quadro RTX 4000 wins that test decisively, scoring 74540 versus 21237. That 71.5% advantage is the single largest differentiator between the two parts. OpenCL performance matters for compute tasks such as physics simulation, image processing, and general-purpose GPU programming. The Quadro RTX 4000 also records additional benchmark scores across a wide range of tests, including a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1873, a Geekbench Vulkan score of 78844, and a Passmark G3D score of 15117. These figures indicate strong performance in both modern graphics APIs and legacy DirectX paths.

The HD 8970M has no recorded wins in the head-to-head data. Its sole benchmark entry is the Geekbench OpenCL score of 21237. Where it does hold an advantage is in physical characteristics, not performance. It draws 100 W versus 160 W, making it the lower-power option. It is also built for MXM modules, so it fits into laptop-class systems, whereas the Quadro RTX 4000 requires a full PCIe slot and measures 241 mm in length. For portable or legacy systems, the HD 8970M wins on compatibility. For anything measured by the database, the Quadro RTX 4000 is the clear victor.

The Quadro RTX 4000 also wins on memory capacity and bandwidth. It offers 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 416.0 GB/s. The HD 8970M provides 4 GB of GDDR5 on the same 256-bit bus, but only 153.6 GB/s. That 2.7x bandwidth difference directly affects texture streaming, large dataset handling, and high-resolution rendering. The NVIDIA card further dominates in pixel and texture throughput, with 98.88 GPixel/s and 222.5 GTexel/s respectively, versus 28.80 GPixel/s and 72.00 GTexel/s for AMD.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different architectural eras. The AMD Radeon HD 8970M uses the Neptune chip built on GCN 1.0, fabricated on a 28 nm TSMC process. It contains 2,800 million transistors on a 212 mm² die, with a transistor density of 13.2 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 uses the TU104 chip on the Turing architecture, fabricated on a 12 nm TSMC process. It packs 13,600 million transistors onto a 545 mm² die, achieving 25.0 million transistors per square millimeter. The NVIDIA chip is larger, denser, and far more complex.

Core configuration differences are stark. The HD 8970M has 1280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The Quadro RTX 4000 has 2304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Beyond raw counts, the NVIDIA card adds 36 ray tracing cores and 288 tensor cores, neither of which exists on the AMD part. These dedicated units enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI-based workloads, features absent from the 2013-era GCN design.

Clock speeds also favor NVIDIA. The HD 8970M operates at an 850 MHz base and 900 MHz boost. The Quadro RTX 4000 runs at 1005 MHz base and 1545 MHz boost. Combined with the higher core counts, this yields a major compute throughput gap: the NVIDIA card delivers 7.119 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the AMD card manages 2.304 TFLOPS. The Quadro RTX 4000 also provides FP16 performance at 14.24 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio, while the HD 8970M lists no FP16 capability at all.

Memory technology differs as well. The HD 8970M uses GDDR5 at 1200 MHz, with an effective data rate of 4.8 Gbps. The Quadro RTX 4000 uses GDDR6 at 1625 MHz, with 13 Gbps effective. Both use a 256-bit bus, but the newer memory standard gives NVIDIA a 416.0 GB/s bandwidth figure versus 153.6 GB/s for AMD.

API support shows the age gap clearly. The HD 8970M supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Quadro RTX 4000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The newer card also offers display outputs including three DisplayPort 1.4a ports and a USB Type-C connector, while the AMD card’s outputs are listed as portable device dependent.

Physical design differs completely. The HD 8970M is an MXM module, designed for laptops and compact systems. The Quadro RTX 4000 is a single-slot desktop card measuring 241 mm by 111 mm. It requires one 8-pin power connector and a 450 W power supply suggestion. The AMD card draws 100 W, the NVIDIA card 160 W. The NVIDIA card also includes a 1x 8-pin power connector, while the AMD card has no listed power connector due to its mobile nature.

Release timing reflects the architectural gap. The HD 8970M launched in May 2013 as part of the Solar System generation, following the London predecessor and preceding the Gem System successor. The Quadro RTX 4000 launched in November 2018, succeeding Quadro Volta and preceding Workstation Ampere. Both are now end-of-life products, but they represent different generations of workstation graphics.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 has 2304 shading units, while the AMD Radeon HD 8970M has 1280. That is an 80% higher count for NVIDIA.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon HD 8970M support ray tracing?

A: No. The HD 8970M has no ray tracing cores. The Quadro RTX 4000 includes 36 dedicated ray tracing cores.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each card provide?

A: The HD 8970M offers 153.6 GB/s from 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. The Quadro RTX 4000 offers 416.0 GB/s from 8 GB of GDDR6 on the same 256-bit bus.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The HD 8970M is rated at 100 W, while the Quadro RTX 4000 is rated at 160 W. The NVIDIA card also lists a suggested 450 W power supply.

Q: Which card is better for modern DirectX workloads?

A: The Quadro RTX 4000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The HD 8970M only supports DirectX 12 (11_1), which is an earlier feature level.

Q: What is the OpenCL score difference?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro RTX 4000 scores 74540 versus 21237 for the HD 8970M, a 71.5% advantage for NVIDIA.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records exactly one shared benchmark between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 scores 74540, while the AMD Radeon HD 8970M scores 21237. The delta is 71.5% in favor of NVIDIA. This is not a close contest. In raw terms, the Quadro RTX 4000 delivers more than three times the OpenCL score of the HD 8970M. That single measurement encapsulates the entire performance relationship between the two products.

Looking at the individual strengths, the Quadro RTX 4000’s additional benchmark entries provide context for its OpenCL dominance. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1873 demonstrates strong modern API performance. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 78844 surpasses its own OpenCL score, indicating excellent compute throughput across multiple APIs. Passmark results show 15117 in G3D, 6176 in GPU compute, and 846 in G2D. Legacy DirectX tests show 205 in DirectX 9, 128 in DirectX 11, 108 in DirectX 10, and 52 in DirectX 12. These figures paint a picture of a versatile workstation GPU that handles both old and new workloads competently.

The HD 8970M has no such breadth in the database. Its only recorded score is the OpenCL result, and that score places it in the 66th percentile of all GPUs. The Quadro RTX 4000, despite its much higher OpenCL score, sits in the 61st percentile. This discrepancy occurs because the percentile ranks each GPU against the full database of all recorded graphics cards, and the HD 8970M’s single score benefits from comparison against a wide range of weaker integrated and entry-level parts. The Quadro RTX 4000’s average score across its many benchmarks is 17789, which is lower than its OpenCL peak but still respectable. The HD 8970M’s average score is 21237, matching its single OpenCL result.

The nearest rivals in the database further illuminate each card’s standing. The HD 8970M’s closest competitor is the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL with an average score of 21153, a 0.4% difference. The NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile scores 21379, a 0.7% gap. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 scores 21035, a 1% difference, and the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 scores 21629, a 1.8% gap. These rivals are all within 2% of the HD 8970M, showing that the 2013 card still competes with much newer low-end and midrange parts in average benchmark terms.

The Quadro RTX 4000’s nearest rivals are notably different. The AMD Radeon HD 7790 scores 17666, a 0.7% gap. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 scores 17639, a 0.9% difference. The AMD Radeon 780M scores 17588, a 1.1% gap, and the AMD Radeon Pro 560 scores 17551, a 1.4% difference. These rivals include both a 2013-era AMD desktop card and modern NVIDIA and AMD parts, all clustered within 1.4% of the Quadro RTX 4000’s average score.

The biggest win in the head-to-head data belongs to the Quadro RTX 4000 in OpenCL, where its 71.5% advantage is the only recorded head-to-head result. The HD 8970M records zero wins. Every measurable comparison favors NVIDIA. The only areas where the AMD card leads are qualitative: lower power draw at 100 W versus 160 W, and a smaller MXM form factor suited to portable systems. For anyone measuring performance, the Quadro RTX 4000 is the definitive winner. For anyone maintaining a legacy laptop, the HD 8970M remains a functional, low-power option that still lands within 2% of its nearest rivals in the database.