GPU Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data splits these two GPUs into distinctly different use cases. The AMD Radeon RX 7700S wins both head-to-head benchmark comparisons, taking the Geekbench OpenCL test by a massive margin and the Geekbench Vulkan test by a narrow one. For compute-heavy workloads that rely on OpenCL, the RX 7700S is the clear choice, as its score of 62,983 dwarfs the CMP 70HX's 25,135. That is a 150.6% advantage, meaning the AMD part delivers well over double the OpenCL performance of its rival.

The NVIDIA CMP 70HX, however, is not without its own territory. Its Vulkan score of 35,817 is only 1.6% behind the RX 7700S's 36,380, which shows that in graphics API workloads, the two are effectively in the same class. The CMP 70HX also holds advantages in raw specifications that matter for certain tasks: it carries 3,840 shading units versus 2,048, has a 256-bit memory bus versus 128-bit, and offers 608.3 GB/s of memory bandwidth versus 288.0 GB/s. These numbers suggest the NVIDIA part is built for memory-intensive operations, even if the benchmark data does not show it winning any recorded test.

The RX 7700S also wins on efficiency in the sense of power draw, with a 100 W TDP compared to the CMP 70HX's suggested 200 W power supply requirement. For mobile or compact systems, the AMD part is the only viable option, since it is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors, while the CMP 70HX is a dual-slot card with a 1x 12-pin connector and no display outputs. That makes the CMP 70HX unsuitable for any conventional desktop use, whereas the RX 7700S is designed for portable devices.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two is substantial. The AMD Radeon RX 7700S uses the Navi 33 chip built on RDNA 3.0 architecture, codenamed "Hotpink Bonefish," and belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 7000M) generation. It is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 65.2M per mm². The NVIDIA CMP 70HX, by contrast, uses the GA104 chip on Ampere architecture from the Mining GPUs generation. It is built on Samsung's 8 nm process, packing 17,400 million transistors into a 392 mm² die, for a density of 44.4M per mm². The AMD chip is denser and smaller, while the NVIDIA chip has more raw transistors but in a much larger physical package.

Clock speeds also differ sharply. The RX 7700S runs at a 1500 MHz base, 2200 MHz game clock, and 2500 MHz boost. The CMP 70HX is far more conservative, with a 1365 MHz base and 1395 MHz boost, no game clock listed. Memory clocks tell a different story: the AMD part uses 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) on GDDR6, while the NVIDIA part uses 1188 MHz (19 Gbps effective) on GDDR6X. The CMP 70HX's wider 256-bit bus and faster memory type give it more than double the bandwidth (608.3 GB/s versus 288.0 GB/s), but its compute rates lag.

Compute throughput is where the AMD architecture shines. The RX 7700S delivers 20.48 TFLOPS FP32 and 40.96 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio). The CMP 70HX delivers only 10.71 TFLOPS FP32 and 10.71 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1 ratio), meaning the AMD part has nearly double the FP32 throughput and four times the FP16 throughput. The RX 7700S also has 32 ray tracing cores and 128 texture mapping units, versus 30 RT cores and 120 TMUs on the CMP 70HX. The NVIDIA part counters with 120 tensor cores, which the AMD part lacks entirely, and both have 64 ROPs. Pixel rate favors AMD at 160.0 GPixel/s versus 89.28 GPixel/s, and texture rate favors AMD at 320.0 GTexel/s versus 167.4 GTexel/s.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct comparisons between these GPUs, and the results are lopsided in one test and nearly even in the other.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon RX 7700S scores 62,983 against the NVIDIA CMP 70HX's 25,135. That is a 150.6% delta, the largest gap in any recorded metric. This result aligns with the FP32 and FP16 throughput differences, where the RX 7700S has roughly double to quadruple the compute rates. OpenCL workloads, which often scale with raw shader throughput and clock speed, clearly favor the AMD architecture. The RX 7700S's 2500 MHz boost clock versus 1395 MHz on the CMP 70HX is a major factor, as is its smaller, denser 6 nm process allowing higher sustained clocks.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the margin shrinks dramatically. The RX 7700S scores 36,380, and the CMP 70HX scores 35,817, a delta of only 1.6%. This near-tie suggests that Vulkan workloads are less sensitive to raw FP32 throughput and more dependent on memory bandwidth and other factors. The CMP 70HX's 608.3 GB/s bandwidth and 256-bit bus likely compensate for its lower clock speeds and compute rates in this API. The RX 7700S still wins, but the data shows that in graphics-centric tasks, the two are close competitors.

The average benchmark scores in the database reinforce this split. The RX 7700S has an average score of 33,849, placing it at the 78th percentile among all GPUs. The CMP 70HX averages 30,476, at the 75th percentile. The RX 7700S's nearest rivals by average score include the AMD Radeon HD 7950 (33,951, delta -0.3%), AMD Radeon RX 480 (33,997, delta -0.4%), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 5 GB (33,694, delta +0.5%), and NVIDIA RTX A5000 (33,622, delta +0.7%). The CMP 70HX sits near the NVIDIA Tesla M60 (30,490, delta 0%), AMD Radeon RX 6700 (30,433, delta +0.1%), AMD Radeon RX 6800 (30,095, delta +1.3%), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti (29,945, delta +1.8%). These rival lists show that the RX 7700S competes with older high-end cards, while the CMP 70HX hangs with mid-range desktop GPUs.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7700S. It delivers 20.48 TFLOPS FP32 and 40.96 TFLOPS FP16, compared to the NVIDIA CMP 70HX's 10.71 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16.

Q: How much faster is the RX 7700S in OpenCL?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RX 7700S scores 62,983 versus the CMP 70HX's 25,135, a 150.6% advantage. That is more than double the performance.

Q: Are they close in any benchmark?

A: Yes, in Geekbench Vulkan the RX 7700S scores 36,380 and the CMP 70HX scores 35,817, a margin of only 1.6%.

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA CMP 70HX. It has 608.3 GB/s from 8 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, while the RX 7700S has 288.0 GB/s from 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: Can the CMP 70HX be used for display output?

A: No. The CMP 70HX has no display outputs, whereas the RX 7700S's display outputs are portable device dependent.

Q: What is the production status of each?

A: The RX 7700S is Active, while the CMP 70HX is End-of-life.

The Verdict

The data points to one clear conclusion: the AMD Radeon RX 7700S is the superior GPU for general compute and graphics workloads. It wins both recorded head-to-head benchmarks, holds a 150.6% lead in OpenCL and a 1.6% lead in Vulkan. Its average benchmark score of 33,849 sits at the 78th percentile, three points higher than the CMP 70HX's 75th percentile. The RX 7700S also offers higher clock speeds, double the FP32 throughput, quadruple the FP16 throughput, and a significantly smaller and denser chip on a more advanced 6 nm process.

The NVIDIA CMP 70HX is not without merit, but its strengths are narrow. Its memory bandwidth of 608.3 GB/s is more than double the RX 7700S's, and its 120 tensor cores provide capabilities the AMD part lacks. However, these advantages do not translate into any benchmark win in the database. The CMP 70HX is also end-of-life, has no display outputs, and requires a 200 W power supply, making it unsuitable for most users.

For anyone choosing between these two, the RX 7700S is the pick for compute tasks, mobile systems, and any workload where OpenCL or Vulkan performance matters. The CMP 70HX should only be considered for specialized memory-bandwidth-heavy tasks, and even then, its lack of display outputs and end-of-life status are serious drawbacks. The benchmark data is unambiguous: the RX 7700S wins on performance, efficiency, and usability.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Radeon RX 7700S | NVIDIA CMP 70HX |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Ampere |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 8 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Samsung |

| Transistors | 13,300 million | 17,400 million |

| Die Size | 204 mm² | 392 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 65.2M / mm² | 44.4M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1500 MHz | 1365 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2500 MHz | 1395 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) | 1188 MHz (19 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6X |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 288.0 GB/s | 608.3 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 3840 |

| TMUs | 128 | 120 |

| ROPs | 64 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 32 | 30 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 120 |

| Pixel Rate | 160.0 GPixel/s | 89.28 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 320.0 GTexel/s | 167.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 20.48 TFLOPS | 10.71 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 40.96 TFLOPS (2:1) | 10.71 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 100 W | Not listed |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 12-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 200 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 1.0 x4 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | No outputs |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |