AMD Radeon RX 470 vs NVIDIA T1000 8 GB Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data presents a clear, if narrow, picture. The AMD Radeon RX 470 claims the sole head-to-head victory in the recorded database, decisively outperforming the NVIDIA T1000 8 GB in the Geekbench Vulkan test. The RX 470 scores 39,884 points against the T1000's 34,561, a difference of 13.3% in AMD's favor. This single data point defines the competitive landscape: for raw compute throughput in a modern cross-platform graphics API, the older AMD card holds the advantage.

However, the NVIDIA T1000 8 GB wins in every other measurable category that matters for a professional workstation context. Its architecture, while producing lower raw FP32 throughput, is built for efficiency and specific professional workloads. The T1000's 2.500 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is significantly lower than the RX 470's 4.940 TFLOPS, but this does not translate into a loss in the Vulkan benchmark. Instead, the T1000's Turing architecture, with its dedicated hardware features, allows it to compete more closely than raw specs suggest. The data shows the T1000 occupies the 79th percentile among all GPUs, while the RX 470 sits at the 74th percentile, indicating the NVIDIA card has broader overall capability in the database's aggregated metrics.

The use-case split is therefore stark. The AMD Radeon RX 470 is the pick for scenarios demanding maximum raw shader throughput in gaming or compute workloads that heavily utilize FP32 operations. Its higher shading unit count (2048 vs. 896) and TMU count (128 vs. 56) are direct contributors to its Vulkan win. Conversely, the NVIDIA T1000 8 GB is the choice for professional environments where its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory, single-slot form factor, and 50 W TDP make it invaluable. The database records no wins for the T1000 in head-to-head tests, but its feature set and benchmark percentile suggest its utility lies in deployment flexibility and software ecosystem rather than brute-force benchmark scores.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the only direct benchmark comparison in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 470 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test, scoring 39,884 points compared to the NVIDIA T1000 8 GB's 34,561 points, a 13.3% lead for AMD.

Q: How do their overall performance percentiles compare?

A: The NVIDIA T1000 8 GB sits in the 79th percentile among all GPUs, while the AMD Radeon RX 470 sits in the 74th percentile. This indicates the T1000 has a higher aggregated standing in the database's metrics.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The NVIDIA T1000 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon RX 470 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 211.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The NVIDIA T1000 has a TDP of 50 W, while the AMD Radeon RX 470 has a TDP of 120 W. The T1000 requires no power connectors and suggests a 250 W PSU, whereas the RX 470 needs a single 6-pin connector and suggests a 300 W PSU.

Q: Which card offers more raw FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 470 offers significantly more, with 4.940 TFLOPS compared to the NVIDIA T1000's 2.500 TFLOPS. Despite this, the T1000 still achieves a higher overall percentile ranking.

Q: What are the physical size differences?

A: The NVIDIA T1000 is a single-slot card measuring 156 mm in length and 69 mm in height. The AMD Radeon RX 470 is a dual-slot card measuring 240 mm in length, 95 mm in height, and 35 mm in width.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains exactly one head-to-head benchmark between these two cards: Geekbench Vulkan. This is the definitive comparative data point available. The AMD Radeon RX 470 emerges victorious with a score of 39,884, outperforming the NVIDIA T1000 8 GB's 34,561 by a margin of 13.3%. This is a substantial gap in a modern graphics API, indicating that the RX 470's GCN architecture, despite its age, handles Vulkan workloads with greater efficiency.

The 13.3% delta is notable because it contradicts expectations set by the core specifications. The RX 470 has 2,048 shading units and a texture rate of 154.4 GTexel/s, dwarfing the T1000's 896 shading units and 78.12 GTexel/s. Yet the T1000's Turing architecture, with its more advanced scheduling and cache hierarchy, manages to close much of the gap. The T1000's pixel rate of 44.64 GPixel/s is actually higher than the RX 470's 38.59 GPixel/s, despite the latter having a faster memory bus. This suggests the T1000's ROP efficiency is superior.

For context, the T1000's nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon HD 7970 (avg score 34,541, delta 0.1%), NVIDIA A2 (avg score 34,690, delta -0.4%), NVIDIA TITAN V (avg score 34,355, delta 0.6%), and NVIDIA RTX A1000 (avg score 34,207, delta 1%). The T1000's score sits comfortably within this cluster, meaning its Vulkan performance is consistent with a wide range of professional and high-end consumer GPUs. The RX 470's nearest rivals, including the AMD Radeon RX 6800M (avg score 28,874, delta 0.4%) and Intel Arc A370M (avg score 29,175, delta -0.6%), have much lower average scores, yet the RX 470's Vulkan result of 39,884 is far above its own average of 28,996. This indicates the RX 470 excels specifically in Vulkan, while its other recorded benchmarks (3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 at 842, Geekbench Metal at 41,690, Geekbench OpenCL at 33,568) show more variable performance.

The data shows that in the only shared test, the AMD card is the clear winner. The T1000's strengths lie elsewhere, in its overall percentile ranking and professional feature set rather than raw Vulkan throughput.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge substantially across nearly every specification category. The NVIDIA T1000 8 GB is built on a 12 nm process at TSMC, with 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. The AMD Radeon RX 470 uses a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, packing 5,700 million transistors onto a 232 mm² die. The RX 470 has a higher transistor density at 24.6M / mm² versus the T1000's 23.5M / mm².

Clock speeds favor NVIDIA. The T1000 runs at a base clock of 1065 MHz and boosts to 1395 MHz. The RX 470 is slower on paper, with a 926 MHz base and 1206 MHz boost. Memory speeds tell a different story: the T1000 uses 1250 MHz GDDR6 with 10 Gbps effective, while the RX 470 uses 1650 MHz GDDR5 with 6.6 Gbps effective. The memory bus widths are starkly different, with the T1000 using a 128-bit interface and the RX 470 a 256-bit interface. This leads to the RX 470 having higher memory bandwidth at 211.2 GB/s versus the T1000's 160.0 GB/s.

Compute unit counts are heavily skewed toward AMD. The RX 470 has 2,048 shading units and 128 TMUs, versus the T1000's 896 shading units and 56 TMUs. Both have 32 ROPs. The resulting fill rates show the trade-off: the T1000 has a higher pixel rate (44.64 GPixel/s vs. 38.59 GPixel/s) but a much lower texture rate (78.12 GTexel/s vs. 154.4 GTexel/s). FP32 performance follows the shading unit count, with the RX 470 at 4.940 TFLOPS versus the T1000's 2.500 TFLOPS. Interestingly, FP16 performance on the T1000 is 5.000 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the RX 470 delivers 4.940 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio).

Power and physical specifications are where NVIDIA's professional focus shows. The T1000 has a 50 W TDP, is single-slot, requires no power connectors, and suggests a 250 W PSU. The RX 470 has a 120 W TDP, is dual-slot, requires a single 6-pin connector, and suggests a 300 W PSU. The T1000 measures 156 mm by 69 mm, while the RX 470 is 240 mm by 95 mm by 35 mm. Display outputs also differ: the T1000 offers four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the RX 470 provides one HDMI 2.0b and three DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is fundamental. The NVIDIA T1000 uses the Turing architecture, built on the TU117 chip. Turing introduced significant improvements in shader efficiency, concurrent execution, and dedicated hardware for ray tracing and AI acceleration, although the T1000 does not list RT or Tensor cores. Its FP16 performance is double its FP32 rate, indicating a 2:1 ratio that allows for faster half-precision compute. The T1000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, with the 12_1 feature level indicating support for the latest DirectX 12 features.

The AMD Radeon RX 470 uses the GCN 4.0 architecture on the Ellesmere chip. GCN 4.0 is a mature design focused on massive parallel throughput. It offers FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, meaning no dedicated half-precision acceleration. The RX 470 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The DirectX 12_0 feature level is slightly lower than the T1000's 12_1, but this does not appear to hinder its Vulkan performance. The RX 470's transistor count of 5,700 million on a larger die reflects GCN's more power-hungry design.

The T1000's Turing architecture is designed for lower power consumption and higher efficiency per watt. Its 12 nm process and 50 W TDP are remarkable for a discrete GPU. The RX 470's GCN 4.0, on a 14 nm process, requires 120 W and delivers higher raw throughput. The T1000's memory architecture uses GDDR6, which is more power-efficient per bit than the RX 470's GDDR5. The T1000's smaller 128-bit bus is compensated by faster memory clocks, while the RX 470 relies on a wider 256-bit bus for its bandwidth advantage.

The T1000 is part of the Quadro Turing (Tx000) generation, with a predecessor in Quadro Volta and a successor in Workstation Ampere. The RX 470 belongs to the Arctic Islands (RX 400) generation, with a predecessor in Pirate Islands and a successor in Polaris. These generational placements indicate the T1000 is a professional workstation product, while the RX 470 is a consumer gaming card, even though both are end-of-life in production status.

The Verdict

The recorded data yields a clear verdict: pick the AMD Radeon RX 470 for raw Vulkan compute performance, and pick the NVIDIA T1000 8 GB for professional deployment efficiency and overall database standing. The RX 470's 13.3% lead in the only head-to-head benchmark is decisive for workloads that rely on that API. Its 4.940 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 154.4 GTexel/s texture rate are substantially higher than the T1000's 2.500 TFLOPS and 78.12 GTexel/s, making it the superior choice for compute-heavy tasks that do not require the T1000's professional feature set.

However, the T1000's 79th percentile ranking versus the RX 470's 74th percentile suggests that in a broader range of applications, the NVIDIA card is more consistently capable. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory doubles the RX 470's 4 GB capacity, which is critical for larger datasets and modern workloads. The T1000's 50 W TDP, single-slot design, and lack of power connectors make it far more flexible for small form factor systems, multi-GPU configurations, and environments with strict power budgets. The RX 470's 120 W TDP and dual-slot footprint require more substantial cooling and power delivery.

The T1000's Vulkan score of 34,561 is close to its nearest rivals, including the AMD Radeon HD 7970 and NVIDIA TITAN V, indicating it is a solid performer despite its lower raw specs. The RX 470's Vulkan score of 39,884 is a standout result, far above its own average of 28,996 and its nearest rivals, suggesting it has a specific strength in that API. For users who prioritize the Geekbench Vulkan metric, the RX 470 is the obvious choice. For users who need a low-power, compact professional GPU with more memory and a higher overall percentile, the T1000 is the only sensible option. The data does not support a universal winner; it supports a bifurcated recommendation based on workload priorities.