AMD Radeon RX 7400 vs NVIDIA Rubin GPU Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data presents an unusual comparison: the AMD Radeon RX 7400 has a full set of measured benchmark results, while the NVIDIA Rubin GPU has no recorded benchmark scores at all. This means the AMD card wins every benchmark category by default, not through superior engineering but simply because it is the only one with data.

The RX 7400 shows its strongest result in Passmark G3D with a score of 11897, which places it in the 17th percentile of all GPUs. Its Passmark G2D score of 1209 indicates modest 2D performance. The compute-oriented Passmark GPU Compute score of 5152 suggests the card handles general-purpose workloads better than its DirectX results might imply. The DirectX legacy tests show scores of 176 in DirectX 9, 97 in DirectX 11, 59 in DirectX 10, and 44 in DirectX 12, which reveals an interesting pattern: the card performs progressively worse on newer DirectX APIs.

The NVIDIA Rubin GPU sits in the 50th percentile of all GPUs according to the database, yet it has an average benchmark score of 0 and no recorded test results. Its placement in the percentile ranking appears to be a structural classification rather than a performance measurement. The AMD card, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 2467 across its eight recorded tests. The nearest rivals to the RX 7400 are the AMD Radeon 8040S with an average score of 2440 (1.1% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce 710M at 2433 (1.4% behind), the Intel HD Graphics 610 at 2425 (1.8% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710M at 2422 (1.9% behind). These margins are extremely tight, meaning the RX 7400 barely edges out entry-level integrated and mobile graphics solutions.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Radeon RX 7400 uses the Navi 33 chip built on RDNA 3.0 architecture with the codename Hotpink Bonefish, part of the Navi III generation within the RX 7000 series. It is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 65.2 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU uses the GR100 chip on the Rubin architecture, belonging to the Server Rubin generation, built on a 3 nm process also at TSMC. It packs 336,000 million transistors onto a 1456 mm² die, achieving 230.8 million transistors per square millimeter.

The transistor density difference is substantial: the Rubin GPU packs more than 3.5 times the transistor density of the RX 7400. The die size difference is even more extreme, with the Rubin GPU's 1456 mm² die being roughly seven times larger than the RX 7400's 204 mm². The Rubin GPU is a server-class compute accelerator, and its "No outputs" display configuration confirms this is not a consumer graphics card. The RX 7400, by contrast, offers 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs.

The AMD card belongs to the Navi III generation with predecessor Navi II and successor Navi IV, while the NVIDIA part belongs to the Server Rubin generation with predecessor Server Blackwell and no successor listed. The RX 7400 was released on August 7, 2025, while the Rubin GPU had a release date of December 31, 2025. The Rubin GPU is marked as Active in production status, while the RX 7400 has no production status recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA Rubin GPU delivers 130.0 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the AMD Radeon RX 7400 delivers 16.49 TFLOPS. The Rubin GPU also reaches 260.0 TFLOPS in FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, compared to 32.97 TFLOPS for the AMD card.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare?

A: The Rubin GPU uses 288 GB of HBM4 memory on a 16384-bit bus with 22.1 TB/s of bandwidth. The RX 7400 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Rubin GPU's memory bandwidth is roughly 76 times higher.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The RX 7400 has a TDP of 43 W and a suggested PSU of 200 W, using a single 6-pin power connector. The Rubin GPU has a TDP of 2300 W and a suggested PSU of 2700 W, with no power connector listed because it uses an SXM Module form factor.

Q: Which GPU supports DirectX?

A: Only the AMD Radeon RX 7400 supports DirectX, with DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support, along with OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, indicating it is not designed for consumer graphics APIs.

Q: How does the RX 7400 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RX 7400 has an average benchmark score of 2467, placing it 1.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon 8040S, 1.4% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 710M, 1.8% ahead of the Intel HD Graphics 610, and 1.9% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710M.

Q: What is the transistor count difference between the two chips?

A: The NVIDIA Rubin GPU contains 336,000 million transistors, while the AMD Radeon RX 7400 contains 13,300 million transistors. The Rubin GPU has approximately 25 times more transistors on its die.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category. The process node differs significantly: the RX 7400 uses 6 nm TSMC fabrication, while the Rubin GPU uses 3 nm TSMC fabrication. Transistor counts are 13,300 million for AMD versus 336,000 million for NVIDIA. Die size is 204 mm² versus 1456 mm². Transistor density is 65.2 million per mm² versus 230.8 million per mm².

Clock speeds show an interesting inversion. The RX 7400 has a base clock of 1452 MHz and a boost clock of 2300 MHz, with a game clock of 2200 MHz. The Rubin GPU has a much lower base clock of 700 MHz but a boost clock of 2267 MHz, nearly matching the AMD card's boost. Memory clocks are 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for the AMD card versus 2695 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective) for the NVIDIA part.

Memory configuration is entirely different: 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth for AMD, versus 288 GB HBM4 on a 16384-bit bus with 22.1 TB/s bandwidth for NVIDIA. The RX 7400 has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores. The Rubin GPU has 28672 shading units, 896 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 896 tensor cores, with no ray tracing core count recorded.

Pixel and texture rates differ in unexpected ways. The RX 7400 achieves 147.2 GPixel/s and 257.6 GTexel/s. The Rubin GPU achieves only 54.41 GPixel/s despite its massive compute resources, but delivers 2,031.2 GTexel/s. The low pixel rate on the Rubin GPU likely reflects its 24 ROPs, which is far fewer than the RX 7400's 64 ROPs. The form factors are also distinct: the RX 7400 is a dual-slot card with PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the Rubin GPU uses an SXM Module with PCIe 6.0 x16. The RX 7400 offers display outputs, while the Rubin GPU has none.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

There are no recorded head-to-head benchmark results between these two GPUs, and the NVIDIA Rubin GPU has an empty benchmark array. The only measurable comparison comes from the RX 7400's individual scores. The Passmark G3D score of 11897 is the highest single result for the AMD card, followed by the GPU Compute score of 5152. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test produced a score of 1103, which is a demanding modern test and represents a relatively modest result.

The RX 7400's DirectX results reveal a performance hierarchy that runs counter to expectation. The DirectX 9 score of 176 stands well above the DirectX 11 score of 97, which in turn is nearly double the DirectX 10 score of 59. The DirectX 12 score of 44 is the lowest of the group. This pattern suggests the card's architectural strengths align more with legacy workloads than with modern API features, despite supporting DirectX 12 Ultimate. The 2D score of 1209 is comparatively strong, indicating that the card handles desktop and 2D acceleration tasks comfortably.

The nearest rival comparisons place the RX 7400 at the top of a very tightly clustered group. A 1.1% lead over the AMD Radeon 8040S and a 1.4% lead over the NVIDIA GeForce 710M represent margins that could easily be reversed with driver updates or different test conditions. The percentile ranking of 17 for the RX 7400 places it in the lower fifth of all GPUs tracked by the database. The Rubin GPU's 50th percentile ranking, despite having no benchmark data, appears to be a default placement rather than a measured result.

The Verdict

The data does not support a conventional head-to-head comparison because only one of the two products has measured performance results. The AMD Radeon RX 7400 is a low-power consumer graphics card with 8 GB of memory, a 43 W TDP, and benchmark scores that place it in the 17th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are integrated graphics and entry-level mobile GPUs, with performance deltas under 2%. This positions the card at the entry level of the consumer graphics market.

The NVIDIA Rubin GPU is a server accelerator with 288 GB of HBM4 memory, 2300 W TDP, and 130.0 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. It has no display outputs, no consumer API support, and no recorded benchmark scores. Its 50th percentile ranking in the database appears to be a structural default rather than a performance measurement. The two products serve entirely different markets: the RX 7400 targets consumer desktop systems with display output and DirectX support, while the Rubin GPU targets server compute environments with tensor cores and massive memory bandwidth.

The choice between them depends entirely on the workload context. For DirectX-based graphics workloads, only the RX 7400 qualifies, as it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. For compute-heavy server workloads, the Rubin GPU offers 896 tensor cores, 22.1 TB/s of memory bandwidth, and 260.0 TFLOPS of FP16 performance. The RX 7400's FP16 performance of 32.97 TFLOPS, while respectable for its class, is dwarfed by the server part. The data shows two products with almost no overlap in specification, capability, or intended use. The RX 7400 wins every recorded benchmark because it is the only one with recorded benchmarks, but the Rubin GPU's specifications indicate a fundamentally different performance class that the current database measurements do not capture.