AMD Radeon RX 470 vs NVIDIA RTX A5000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between the NVIDIA RTX A5000 and the AMD Radeon RX 470 across all shared benchmark tests. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the RTX A5000 scores 3783 against the RX 470's 842, a delta of 349.3% in favor of the NVIDIA card. This is not a marginal lead; it places the A5000 in a completely different performance tier for modern DirectX 12 workloads.

The gap widens further in compute-oriented tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX A5000 records 157905 points, while the RX 470 manages 33568, representing a 370.4% advantage. This nearly quadruples the AMD card's output in raw compute throughput, a result consistent with the massive difference in shading units and memory bandwidth between the two architectures.

Vulkan performance tells a similar story, though the margin narrows slightly. The RTX A5000 achieves 137828 in Geekbench Vulkan, against the RX 470's 39884, a 245.6% lead. While still a dominant victory, the smaller delta compared to OpenCL suggests the RX 470's GCN architecture handles Vulkan's lower-level API relatively better than it does OpenCL, though it remains far behind.

The A5000 wins all three head-to-head comparisons, with zero wins for the RX 470. The average benchmark score, which aggregates results across a broader test suite, shows the A5000 at 33622 versus the RX 470's 28996. Notably, the A5000's nearest rivals in the database include the GeForce GTX 1060 5 GB at -0.2% delta, the Radeon RX 7700S at -0.7%, and the Radeon HD 7950 at -1%. The RX 470's nearest rivals, by contrast, include the Radeon RX 6800M at +0.4% delta, the Intel Arc A370M at -0.6%, and the Radeon RX Vega M GH at -0.7%. This places both cards in similar percentile territory, 78th for the A5000 and 74th for the RX 470 across all GPUs, but the direct comparison reveals the A5000's superiority in every measured workload.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is fundamental. The NVIDIA RTX A5000 uses the GA102 chip on Samsung's 8 nm process, packing 28,300 million transistors onto a 628 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.1 million per square millimeter. The AMD Radeon RX 470 uses the Ellesmere chip on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process, with 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, for a density of 24.6 million per square millimeter. The A5000 therefore integrates roughly five times the transistors on nearly three times the die area, with almost double the transistor density.

The A5000 belongs to the Ampere architecture, specifically the Workstation Ampere generation, while the RX 470 is built on GCN 4.0 from the Arctic Islands generation. This represents a generational chasm: the A5000 was released in 2021, the RX 470 in 2016, a five-year gap that explains the feature set differences. The A5000 includes 64 dedicated ray tracing cores and 256 tensor cores, neither of which exist on the RX 470, which has no ray tracing or tensor hardware at all. This means the A5000 can accelerate DirectX 12 Ultimate workloads with ray tracing and AI-based features, while the RX 470 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0) without those extensions.

Compute resources also differ dramatically. The A5000 has 8192 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 96 render output units. The RX 470 has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. These numbers translate directly into throughput: the A5000 delivers 27.77 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 (1:1 ratio), while the RX 470 delivers 4.940 TFLOPS in both precisions. The A5000's pixel rate is 162.7 GPixel/s and texture rate is 433.9 GTexel/s, versus 38.59 GPixel/s and 154.4 GTexel/s for the RX 470.

Memory architecture is another point of divergence. The A5000 uses 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, achieving 768.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 470 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, with 211.2 GB/s bandwidth. The A5000 also runs its memory at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) versus 1650 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective) for the RX 470. This gives the A5000 more than three times the memory bandwidth, which is critical for large datasets and high-resolution textures.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the NVIDIA RTX A5000 is the clear choice for anyone requiring maximum compute performance, ray tracing capability, or large memory capacity. It wins every head-to-head benchmark by margins ranging from 245.6% to 370.4%. The A5000's 24 GB memory buffer is suitable for workloads that exceed the RX 470's 4 GB limit, such as large 3D scenes, machine learning inference, or high-resolution video processing. Its 64 RT cores and 256 tensor cores provide hardware acceleration that the RX 470 simply cannot offer.

The AMD Radeon RX 470, while far behind in absolute performance, has its own profile in the database. Its nearest rivals include the RX 6800M and Arc A370M, suggesting it still competes in a lower tier of GPUs. Its 120 W TDP and 300 W suggested PSU make it a lighter power load than the A5000's 230 W TDP and 550 W suggested PSU. For legacy DirectX 12 (12_0) workloads or Vulkan applications that do not require ray tracing, the RX 470 remains functional, but its 4 GB memory and 4.940 TFLOPS FP32 limit its scope.

The percentile rankings show the A5000 at the 78th percentile and the RX 470 at the 74th percentile across all GPUs, meaning both sit above the median, but the A5000's average score of 33622 versus the RX 470's 28996 reflects a 16% overall advantage in the aggregate. The direct comparison, however, reveals the A5000 is not merely 16% faster; it is 245% to 370% faster in every shared test. This suggests the aggregate average is skewed by the RX 470's inclusion of a Geekbench Metal score (41690) that the A5000 does not have, which partially masks the true performance gap in cross-platform tests.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification field. The RTX A5000 uses the GA102 chip on 8 nm Samsung process, while the RX 470 uses Ellesmere on 14 nm GlobalFoundries. Transistor counts are 28,300 million versus 5,700 million, die sizes are 628 mm² versus 232 mm², and transistor densities are 45.1M/mm² versus 24.6M/mm². The A5000's base clock is 1170 MHz with a boost of 1695 MHz; the RX 470's base is 926 MHz with a boost of 1206 MHz. Memory clocks are 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) versus 1650 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective).

Memory configurations: the A5000 has 24 GB GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus with 768.0 GB/s bandwidth; the RX 470 has 4 GB GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 211.2 GB/s bandwidth. Shading units are 8192 versus 2048, TMUs are 256 versus 128, ROPs are 96 versus 32. The A5000 has 64 RT cores and 256 tensor cores; the RX 470 has none. Pixel rates are 162.7 GPixel/s versus 38.59 GPixel/s, texture rates are 433.9 GTexel/s versus 154.4 GTexel/s, and FP32/FP16 compute is 27.77 TFLOPS versus 4.940 TFLOPS.

Power and physical specs differ as well. The A5000 has a 230 W TDP with a 1x 8-pin connector and 550 W suggested PSU; the RX 470 has a 120 W TDP with a 1x 6-pin connector and 300 W suggested PSU. Both are dual-slot, but the A5000 is 267 mm long and 112 mm high, while the RX 470 is 240 mm long, 95 mm high, and 35 mm wide. The A5000 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, the RX 470 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs are 4x DisplayPort 1.4a on the A5000 versus 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a on the RX 470. The A5000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4; the RX 470 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The RX 470 had a launch MSRP of 179 USD.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A5000 has an average benchmark score of 33622, while the AMD Radeon RX 470 has 28996.

Q: How large is the performance gap in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12?

A: The RTX A5000 scores 3783 versus the RX 470's 842, a delta of 349.3% in favor of the NVIDIA card.

Q: Does the RX 470 support ray tracing?

A: No, the RX 470 has no ray tracing cores listed in its specifications, while the RTX A5000 has 64 RT cores.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The RTX A5000 has 24 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the RX 470 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The RTX A5000 has a transistor density of 45.1M per mm², versus 24.6M per mm² for the RX 470.

Q: What is the power requirement difference?

A: The RTX A5000 has a 230 W TDP with a 550 W suggested PSU, while the RX 470 has a 120 W TDP with a 300 W suggested PSU.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX A5000 wins in every category that matters for modern, demanding workloads. Its 24 GB memory buffer is indispensable for large datasets, and its 768.0 GB/s bandwidth ensures those datasets can be fed to the GPU without bottlenecking. The 64 RT cores and 256 tensor cores give it exclusive capability in ray-traced rendering and AI-accelerated tasks, which the RX 470 cannot attempt. The A5000's 27.77 TFLOPS FP32 output is more than five times the RX 470's 4.940 TFLOPS, making it the only choice for compute-heavy applications like scientific simulation, deep learning inference, or high-fidelity 3D rendering. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate support and Vulkan 1.4 compatibility ensure it can handle future software requirements, while the RX 470 is capped at DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3.

The AMD Radeon RX 470 wins in scenarios where power consumption and physical footprint are primary constraints. Its 120 W TDP is nearly half the A5000's 230 W, and its 300 W suggested PSU means it can fit into systems with smaller power supplies. Its dimensions of 240 mm by 95 mm by 35 mm make it a more compact card compared to the A5000's 267 mm by 112 mm, which may matter for small-form-factor builds. The RX 470 also has a 1x 6-pin power connector versus the A5000's 1x 8-pin, which could simplify cable management in older power supplies. For legacy applications that only use DirectX 12 (12_0) features and do not require large memory or high compute throughput, the RX 470 remains a functional option, though the benchmark data shows it trails the A5000 by at least 245.6% in every shared test. The RX 470's Geekbench Metal score of 41690 is notable, but that test is not available for the A5000, so it cannot be directly compared.