AMD Radeon RX 9050 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for the AMD Radeon RX 9050 against the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER. The headToHeadBenchmarks array is empty, and the AMD unit carries no benchmark scores, no average score, and no nearest rivals in the database. The NVIDIA card, by contrast, has a full suite of ten recorded test results, an average benchmark score of 43223, and a percentile ranking of 83 across all GPUs.

The absence of data for the AMD card means the comparison cannot be framed as a win-loss tally. The winsA and winsB fields are both zero, which is accurate only in the sense that no direct contests were recorded. What can be analyzed is the NVIDIA card's recorded performance profile on its own, and then the architectural and specification delta between the two products.

The RTX 4070 SUPER posts an average benchmark score of 43223. Its nearest rivals in the database sit tightly around that figure: the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB at 43262 (0.1% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile at 43268 (0.1% ahead), the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 at 43301 (0.2% ahead), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile at 43667 (1% ahead). This clustering indicates the RTX 4070 SUPER sits in a well-populated performance band where a few percent separates adjacent products.

Within its own test suite, the RTX 4070 SUPER shows substantial variation. The PassMark G3D score of 29995 dominates its compute-heavy results, while the PassMark DirectX 9 score of 344 and DirectX 11 score of 273 show legacy API performance. The Geekbench Vulkan result of 205624 exceeds the OpenCL result of 172795, suggesting the architecture favors Vulkan workloads in that benchmark. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 4627 provides a modern DX12 data point.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs diverge sharply at the silicon level. The AMD Radeon RX 9050 uses the Navi 44 chip built on RDNA 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER uses the AD104 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. The AMD part carries 29,700 million transistors on a 199 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 149.2M per mm². The NVIDIA part carries 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, with a density of 121.8M per mm². The AMD chip achieves higher density on a smaller die, while the NVIDIA chip packs more total transistors across a larger area.

Clock behavior differs meaningfully. The RX 9050 lists a base clock of 1330 MHz, a boost clock of 2600 MHz, and a game clock of 1920 MHz. The RTX 4070 SUPER lists a base clock of 1980 MHz and a boost clock of 2475 MHz, with no game clock field. The AMD card has a higher boost ceiling by 125 MHz, but the NVIDIA card starts from a much higher base frequency. Memory clocks also differ: the RX 9050 runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective, while the RTX 4070 SUPER runs at 1313 MHz with 21 Gbps effective.

Compute resources show a wide gap. The RX 9050 has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 16 RT cores, and no tensor cores. The RTX 4070 SUPER has 7168 shading units, 224 TMUs, 80 ROPs, 56 RT cores, and 224 tensor cores. The NVIDIA card carries roughly seven times the shading units, over three times the TMUs, and 3.5 times the RT cores. The tensor core count of 224 on the NVIDIA part has no counterpart on the AMD part.

The process node difference is notable: the AMD card uses a 4 nm process versus the NVIDIA card's 5 nm process, even though both are TSMC fabs. The RX 9050's higher transistor density (149.2M per mm² versus 121.8M per mm²) reflects the tighter node, but the NVIDIA chip's larger transistor budget (35,800 million versus 29,700 million) gives it more absolute hardware resources.

Where Each One Wins

Without recorded benchmarks for the RX 9050, a direct workload-by-workload comparison is impossible. The database does, however, allow a speculative read based on specifications. The RTX 4070 SUPER holds clear advantages in raw compute throughput: its FP32 rating of 35.48 TFLOPS is 3.33 times the RX 9050's 10.65 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 554.4 GTexel/s is 3.33 times the RX 9050's 166.4 GTexel/s. Its pixel rate of 198.0 GPixel/s is 1.19 times the RX 9050's 166.4 GPixel/s. Memory bandwidth favors the NVIDIA card at 504.2 GB/s versus 288.0 GB/s, a 1.75 times advantage.

The RX 9050 counters in power efficiency. Its TDP of 92 W is less than half the RTX 4070 SUPER's 220 W. The suggested power supply for the AMD card is 250 W versus 550 W for the NVIDIA card. The RX 9050 uses a single 8-pin connector, while the RTX 4070 SUPER uses a single 16-pin connector. For constrained builds or systems with modest power delivery, the AMD card's lower draw is a structural advantage.

Memory capacity and type also split the use cases. The RX 9050 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus. The RTX 4070 SUPER has 12 GB of GDDR6X on a 192-bit bus. The larger capacity and faster memory type on the NVIDIA card support higher-resolution textures and larger working sets. The RX 9050's smaller frame buffer may limit certain modern workloads, though its lower power envelope makes it suitable for compact systems.

The PCIe interface differs as well: the RX 9050 uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the RTX 4070 SUPER uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The newer bus standard on the AMD card provides greater theoretical transfer headroom, though real-world gains depend on workload and platform support. Display outputs also differ: the RX 9050 offers 1x HDMI 2.1b and 2x DisplayPort 2.1a, while the RTX 4070 SUPER offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The AMD card supports the newer DisplayPort revision.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: Only the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER has a recorded average benchmark score, at 43223. The AMD Radeon RX 9050 has no benchmark entries and an average score of 0.

Q: How does the RTX 4070 SUPER compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The database places the RTX 4070 SUPER at an average score of 43223. The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB is 0.1% ahead at 43262, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile is 0.1% ahead at 43268, the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 is 0.2% ahead at 43301, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile is 1% ahead at 43667.

Q: What is the transistor and die size difference between the two cards?

A: The RX 9050 uses 29,700 million transistors on a 199 mm² die. The RTX 4070 SUPER uses 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die.

Q: Which card has more memory and bandwidth?

A: The RTX 4070 SUPER has 12 GB of GDDR6X on a 192-bit bus with 504.2 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 9050 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the TDP and power connector requirement for each?

A: The RX 9050 has a TDP of 92 W and uses a 1x 8-pin connector with a suggested 250 W PSU. The RTX 4070 SUPER has a TDP of 220 W and uses a 1x 16-pin connector with a suggested 550 W PSU.

Q: Does the RX 9050 have tensor cores?

A: No. The RX 9050 lists null tensor cores, while the RTX 4070 SUPER has 224 tensor cores.

The Verdict

The recorded data paints an incomplete picture because the RX 9050 has no benchmark scores, no average score, and no nearest rivals in the database. The RTX 4070 SUPER, by contrast, is fully characterized with ten benchmark results, an average score of 43223, and a percentile ranking of 83. Any verdict must therefore rest on the specification differences and the NVIDIA card's measured performance, not on direct comparative tests.

The RTX 4070 SUPER is the clear choice for compute-heavy workloads based on the recorded data. Its FP32 throughput of 35.48 TFLOPS, texture rate of 554.4 GTexel/s, and memory bandwidth of 504.2 GB/s place it far ahead of the RX 9050's 10.65 TFLOPS, 166.4 GTexel/s, and 288.0 GB/s. The 12 GB GDDR6X frame buffer also exceeds the 8 GB GDDR6 configuration. The 224 tensor cores on the NVIDIA card provide dedicated hardware the AMD card lacks entirely.

The RX 9050 appeals to a different constraint set. Its 92 W TDP, 250 W suggested PSU, and 8-pin connector allow installation in systems where the RTX 4070 SUPER's 220 W TDP and 550 W PSU requirement would be impractical. Its PCIe 5.0 x16 interface and DisplayPort 2.1a outputs represent newer connectivity standards than the RTX 4070 SUPER's PCIe 4.0 x16 and DisplayPort 1.4a. The RX 9050 also uses a denser 4 nm process versus the RTX 4070 SUPER's 5 nm process.

For users who prioritize measured performance and a large frame buffer, the RTX 4070 SUPER is the only option with data support. For users who prioritize low power draw, compact system integration, and newer display output standards, the RX 9050 has structural advantages, but its actual performance remains unquantified in the database.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Radeon RX 9050 | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 4.0 | Ada Lovelace |

| Process node | 4 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 29,700 million | 35,800 million |

| Die size | 199 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor density | 149.2M / mm² | 121.8M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1330 MHz | 1980 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2600 MHz | 2475 MHz |

| Game clock | 1920 MHz | None |

| Memory clock | 2250 MHz 18 Gbps effective | 1313 MHz 21 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 8 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6X |

| Memory bus | 128 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 288.0 GB/s | 504.2 GB/s |

| Shading units | 1024 | 7168 |

| TMUs | 64 | 224 |

| ROPs | 64 | 80 |

| RT cores | 16 | 56 |

| Tensor cores | None | 224 |

| Pixel rate | 166.4 GPixel/s | 198.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 166.4 GTexel/s | 554.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 10.65 TFLOPS | 35.48 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 10.65 TFLOPS (1:1) | 35.48 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 92 W | 220 W |

| Power connectors | 1x 8-pin | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 550 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 2x DisplayPort 2.1a | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Production status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release date | 2026-07-27 | 2024-01-16 |

| Launch MSRP | None | 599 USD |

| Percentile vs all GPUs | 50 | 83 |

| Average benchmark score | 0 | 43223 |