AMD Radeon RX 5700 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z Comparison

# The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 5700 is the superior card in virtually every measurable way. In the two head-to-head benchmarks available, the RX 5700 wins both, with Geekbench OpenCL scores of 69,603 versus the GTX TITAN Z's 25,465—a 63.4% deficit for the older NVIDIA card—and Geekbench Vulkan scores of 64,166 versus 22,006, a 65.7% gap. The average benchmark score tells the same story: the RX 5700 averages 22,170 across its full benchmark suite, while the TITAN Z averages 23,736, but that TITAN Z figure is flattered by being based on only two tests. When directly compared on identical workloads, the AMD card is not merely faster; it is dramatically faster.

For a buyer choosing between these two today, the RX 5700 is the only rational pick. It delivers roughly triple the compute performance in OpenCL and Vulkan, uses half the power, supports modern DirectX 12_1 instead of the TITAN Z's 11_1, and carries PCIe 4.0 rather than PCIe 3.0. The GTX TITAN Z's sole advantage is its 69th percentile ranking versus the RX 5700's 67th, but that ranking is computed from a tiny benchmark sample and does not survive direct comparison. The TITAN Z was an end-of-life product from 2014; the RX 5700, while also end-of-life, is from 2019 and belongs to a fundamentally newer architecture generation. There is no workload in the data where the TITAN Z wins.

# Where Each One Wins

The RX 5700 wins in compute-heavy workloads, as evidenced by its OpenCL and Vulkan dominance. OpenCL is a general-purpose compute API used in rendering, physics simulation, and machine learning; the RX 5700's 69,603 score is 2.7 times the TITAN Z's 25,465. Vulkan, a low-overhead graphics and compute API, shows the same pattern: 64,166 versus 22,006, a 2.9x advantage. The RX 5700 also delivers 7.949 TFLOPS of FP32 compute against the TITAN Z's 5.046 TFLOPS, a 57.5% lead in raw floating-point throughput. Its FP16 performance of 15.90 TFLOPS (2:1) is a feature the TITAN Z lacks entirely.

The TITAN Z has no benchmark wins in the head-to-head data. Its only comparative strengths are structural: 2,880 shading units versus 2,304, 240 texture mapping units versus 144, and 48 ROPs versus 64 (where it actually loses). It has more shading units and TMUs, but those advantages are nullified by its much lower clock speeds—705 MHz base and 876 MHz boost versus the RX 5700's 1,465 MHz base and 1,725 MHz boost. The TITAN Z's texture rate of 210.2 GTexel/s is lower than the RX 5700's 248.4 GTexel/s, and its pixel rate of 52.56 GPixel/s is less than half the RX 5700's 110.4 GPixel/s. In every throughput metric that matters, the newer card wins.

# Architecture Differences

These are two cards from different eras with fundamentally different designs. The GTX TITAN Z is built on NVIDIA's Kepler architecture, using the GK110B chip fabricated on TSMC's 28 nm process. It packs 7,080 million transistors into a 561 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.6 million per square millimeter. The RX 5700 uses AMD's RDNA 1.0 architecture on the Navi 10 chip, built on TSMC's 7 nm process. It contains 10,300 million transistors in a 251 mm² die, for a density of 41.0 million per square millimeter—more than triple the TITAN Z's density. The 7 nm process allows the RX 5700 to deliver higher performance with far fewer resources: 2,304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, all running at much higher clocks.

Memory subsystems differ sharply. The TITAN Z has 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, with 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 5700 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, but achieves 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth—33% more—thanks to the higher 14 Gbps effective memory speed versus 7 Gbps. The RX 5700 also supports PCIe 4.0 x16, doubling the bus bandwidth available to the TITAN Z's PCIe 3.0 x16. API support is a major differentiator: the RX 5700 supports DirectX 12_1 and Vulkan 1.4, while the TITAN Z is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6. Neither card has ray tracing or tensor cores.

Power and physical design reflect the generational gap. The TITAN Z is a 375 W triple-slot card requiring two 8-pin connectors and a 750 W suggested PSU. The RX 5700 is a 180 W dual-slot card with one 6-pin and one 8-pin connector, needing only a 450 W PSU. The TITAN Z is 62 mm wide versus the RX 5700's 36 mm, and both are nearly identical in length (267 mm vs 268 mm) and height (111 mm each). Display outputs differ: the TITAN Z offers 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2, while the RX 5700 provides 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

# FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in compute benchmarks?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5700 wins decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 69,603 versus the GTX TITAN Z's 25,465, a 63.4% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 64,166 versus 22,006, a 65.7% lead.

Q: Does the GTX TITAN Z have any advantage in hardware resources?

A: It has more shading units (2,880 vs 2,304) and more texture mapping units (240 vs 144), but those resources are crippled by lower clocks. The TITAN Z's base clock is 705 MHz and boost is 876 MHz, while the RX 5700 runs at 1,465 MHz base and 1,725 MHz boost. The RX 5700 still achieves higher texture and pixel rates.

Q: How do their memory configurations compare?

A: The RX 5700 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth. The TITAN Z has 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus with 336.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 5700 delivers 33% more bandwidth despite the narrower bus.

Q: Which card has better API support?

A: The RX 5700 supports DirectX 12_1 and Vulkan 1.4, while the TITAN Z is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The TITAN Z has a 375 W TDP, requires two 8-pin power connectors, and needs a 750 W suggested PSU. The RX 5700 has a 180 W TDP, uses one 6-pin and one 8-pin connector, and requires a 450 W suggested PSU.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The TITAN Z averages 23,736 across its two benchmarks, while the RX 5700 averages 22,170 across eleven benchmarks. The RX 5700's average is more representative, and its direct head-to-head wins are far more meaningful than the TITAN Z's narrow average advantage.

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is limited to two tests, but both tell a consistent story of AMD dominance. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 5700 scores 69,603 against the TITAN Z's 25,465. The delta is -63.4%, meaning the TITAN Z achieves only 36.6% of the RX 5700's score. This is not a marginal gap; it is a generational chasm. The RX 5700's FP32 throughput of 7.949 TFLOPS versus the TITAN Z's 5.046 TFLOPS provides the theoretical basis for this result—the AMD card simply has more compute horsepower, and its higher clocks allow it to use its 2,304 shading units more effectively than the TITAN Z can use its 2,880.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the results are even more lopsided: 64,166 for the RX 5700 versus 22,006 for the TITAN Z, a -65.7% delta. Vulkan is a modern low-overhead API, and the RX 5700's RDNA 1.0 architecture was designed for it, while the Kepler-based TITAN Z predates Vulkan's widespread adoption. The TITAN Z's Vulkan support is listed as 1.2.175, but its performance in that API is only about a third of the AMD card's. The RX 5700 also has FP16 support at 15.90 TFLOPS (2:1), which can accelerate certain compute workloads; the TITAN Z has no FP16 figure listed.

Contextualizing these results with the rivals data shows how each card sits in the broader market. The TITAN Z's average score of 23,736 places it within 0.5% of the RTX 3080 Mobile (23,628) and 0.6% below the RX 9070 (23,877). The RX 5700's average of 22,170 is within 0.1% of the RX 6700S (22,154) and 1.4% above the GTX 1060 6 GB (21,856). These rivalries confirm that the TITAN Z, despite its age, holds its own against mid-range mobile GPUs from several generations later—but that does not help it against the RX 5700, which is a desktop card in a different performance class. The percentile rankings (69th for TITAN Z, 67th for RX 5700) are close, but they are computed from different benchmark sets and do not reflect the head-to-head reality.

# Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GTX TITAN Z | AMD Radeon RX 5700 |

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

| Architecture | Kepler | RDNA 1.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 7,080 million | 10,300 million |

| Die Size | 561 mm² | 251 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.6M / mm² | 41.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 705 MHz | 1465 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 876 MHz | 1725 MHz |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | 384 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 336.0 GB/s | 448.0 GB/s |

| Memory Speed | 7 Gbps effective | 14 Gbps effective |

| Shading Units | 2880 | 2304 |

| TMUs | 240 | 144 |

| ROPs | 48 | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 52.56 GPixel/s | 110.4 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 210.2 GTexel/s | 248.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 5.046 TFLOPS | 7.949 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | Not listed | 15.90 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 375 W | 180 W |

| Slot Width | Triple-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | 2x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 750 W | 450 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.175 | 1.4 |

| Display Outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DP 1.2 | 1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DP 1.4a |

| Width | 62 mm | 36 mm |

| Release Date | 2014-05-27 | 2019-07-06 |

| Launch MSRP | 2,999 USD | 349 USD |