AMD Radeon RX 9070 vs AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 is the decisive performer in this comparison, delivering roughly 22 times the FP32 compute of the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU based on the recorded specifications. The RX 9070 targets desktop gaming workloads with a 220 W power envelope, while the Z2 A GPU is a 15 W console-class part designed for efficiency-constrained environments. The database shows the RX 9070 holds the 69th percentile among all GPUs, whereas the Z2 A GPU sits at the 50th percentile with no recorded benchmark scores. For any workload requiring substantial graphics throughput, the RX 9070 is the only viable choice from this pairing. The Z2 A GPU serves scenarios where power consumption is the primary constraint, as its 15 W TDP stands against the RX 9070's 220 W TDP.

Architecture Differences

The RX 9070 uses the Navi 48 chip built on RDNA 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 4 nm TSMC process. The Z2 A GPU uses the Van Gogh chip with RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm TSMC process. The RX 9070 belongs to the Navi IV (RX 9000) generation, while the Z2 A GPU is classified as a Console GPU (AMD) generation. The RX 9070 integrates 53,900 million transistors across a 357 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 151.0 million per mm². The Z2 A GPU contains 2,400 million transistors on a 163 mm² die, with a density of 14.7 million per mm². This represents a structural gap of over an order of magnitude in both raw transistor count and packing density.

The RX 9070 features 3,584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, 128 render output units, and 56 ray tracing cores. The Z2 A GPU features 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 8 ray tracing cores. Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API-level feature parity exists despite the generational difference between RDNA 4.0 and RDNA 2.0. The RX 9070's FP16 throughput matches its FP32 at 36.13 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the Z2 A GPU's FP16 reaches 3.277 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, a notable architectural divergence in compute pipeline design.

Memory subsystems differ substantially. The RX 9070 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 644.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Z2 A GPU also has 16 GB, but the memory is LPDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 102.4 GB/s. The RX 9070's memory clock runs at 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective); the Z2 A GPU's memory clock is 800 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective). The RX 9070 outputs through 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1a, whereas the Z2 A GPU provides a single USB Type-C display output.

FAQ

Q: What is the performance percentile difference between the two GPUs?

A: The RX 9070 ranks in the 69th percentile among all GPUs, while the Z2 A GPU ranks in the 50th percentile. The Z2 A GPU has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, so its percentile reflects positioning rather than measured results.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The RX 9070 delivers 644.6 GB/s over a 256-bit GDDR6 interface. The Z2 A GPU provides 102.4 GB/s over a 128-bit LPDDR5 interface. The RX 9070's bandwidth is more than six times higher.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The RX 9070 has 56 ray tracing cores, compared to 8 on the Z2 A GPU. This gives the RX 9070 a 7x advantage in ray tracing hardware count.

Q: What are the power consumption figures?

A: The RX 9070 has a TDP of 220 W and requires a 550 W suggested PSU with 2x 8-pin power connectors. The Z2 A GPU has a TDP of 15 W and lists no power connector or PSU requirement.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The API feature set is identical even though the underlying architectures differ.

Q: What is the pixel fill rate difference?

A: The RX 9070 achieves 322.6 GPixel/s, while the Z2 A GPU achieves 25.60 GPixel/s. The RX 9070's pixel throughput is roughly 12.6 times higher.

Specification Differences

The database shows clear divergence in nearly every measurable field. Process node: 4 nm (RX 9070) versus 7 nm (Z2 A GPU). Transistors: 53,900 million versus 2,400 million. Die size: 357 mm² versus 163 mm². Transistor density: 151.0 million per mm² versus 14.7 million per mm². Base clock: 1330 MHz versus 1000 MHz. Boost clock: 2520 MHz versus 1600 MHz. Game clock: 2070 MHz on the RX 9070, absent on the Z2 A GPU. Memory clock: 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective) versus 800 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective).

Memory type differs: GDDR6 versus LPDDR5. Bus width: 256-bit versus 128-bit. Bandwidth: 644.6 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s. Shading units: 3,584 versus 512. TMUs: 224 versus 32. ROPs: 128 versus 16. RT cores: 56 versus 8. Pixel rate: 322.6 GPixel/s versus 25.60 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 564.5 GTexel/s versus 51.20 GTexel/s. FP32: 36.13 TFLOPS versus 1.638 TFLOPS. FP16: 36.13 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 3.277 TFLOPS (2:1). TDP: 220 W versus 15 W.

The RX 9070 uses PCIe 5.0 x16 as its bus interface; the Z2 A GPU lists no bus interface. The RX 9070 is dual-slot with 2x 8-pin power connectors and a 550 W suggested PSU; the Z2 A GPU has no slot width, power connector, or PSU data. Display outputs: the RX 9070 has 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1a; the Z2 A GPU has 1x USB Type-C. Release dates: the RX 9070 launched on 2025-03-05, while the Z2 A GPU launched on 2024-12-31. The RX 9070 lists a launch MSRP of 549 USD; the Z2 A GPU has no launch MSRP field.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between these two GPUs, and the Z2 A GPU has an empty benchmark array. Consequently, the comparison relies entirely on specification-derived rates and the RX 9070's recorded scores in individual tests.

The RX 9070's recorded benchmarks establish its measured performance tier. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 6,290. Geekbench OpenCL shows 131,539, and Geekbench Vulkan shows 58,705. Passmark G3D returns 25,381, while Passmark GPU Compute returns 14,737. The average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 23,877. The Z2 A GPU has no scores in the database, so direct numerical comparison on any test is impossible. The specification gap, however, is unambiguous: FP32 compute on the RX 9070 is 36.13 TFLOPS versus 1.638 TFLOPS, a 22.05x advantage. Texture rate is 564.5 GTexel/s versus 51.20 GTexel/s, an 11.02x advantage. Pixel rate is 322.6 GPixel/s versus 25.60 GPixel/s, a 12.60x advantage.

The nearest rivals to the RX 9070 in the database provide context for its standing. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z averages 23,736, which is 0.6% below the RX 9070's average. The AMD Radeon RX 6800S averages 24,063, putting the RX 9070 0.8% behind it. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile averages 23,628, placing it 1.1% behind the RX 9070. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER averages 24,170, putting the RX 9070 1.2% behind it. These deltas fall within a narrow band around the RX 9070's average score, indicating the RX 9070 sits in a dense competitive cluster among desktop and high-end mobile parts. The Z2 A GPU has no rival data, which reinforces its position as a low-power part outside the mainstream benchmarking spectrum.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 9070 wins in every compute and graphics throughput category recorded in the database. Its 36.13 TFLOPS FP32 makes it suitable for demanding desktop rendering, high-resolution gaming, and compute-heavy workloads. The 644.6 GB/s memory bandwidth supports large texture datasets and high-resolution frame buffers. The 16 GB GDDR6 capacity matches the Z2 A GPU's 16 GB, but the RX 9070's bus width and memory type provide far greater sustained throughput. The 56 ray tracing cores give the RX 9070 a hardware advantage in ray-traced scenes compared to the Z2 A GPU's 8 cores. The RX 9070 also carries the architectural benefit of RDNA 4.0 over RDNA 2.0, along with a newer 4 nm process and a 151.0 million per mm² transistor density.

The Z2 A GPU wins in power efficiency. Its 15 W TDP is 93.2% lower than the RX 9070's 220 W TDP. This makes it suitable for portable or power-constrained console-style designs where sustained performance per watt matters more than absolute throughput. Its 7 nm process and 2,400 million transistor count reflect a deliberately small implementation. The single USB Type-C display output aligns with compact form factors. The Z2 A GPU's FP16 rate of 3.277 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio indicates a pipeline optimized for specific efficiency targets rather than raw compute density.

The RX 9070 also holds the advantage in connectivity and expandability. PCIe 5.0 x16 offers high bandwidth to the host system, while the HDMI 2.1b and DisplayPort 2.1a outputs support modern displays. The Z2 A GPU's single USB Type-C output limits it to a narrow set of display configurations. The RX 9070's dual-slot design and 2x 8-pin connectors confirm a desktop-class installation, whereas the Z2 A GPU's lack of slot width, connectors, and PSU requirements positions it as an integrated or low-profile component.

The release timeline shows the RX 9070 launched on 2025-03-05, about two months after the Z2 A GPU's 2024-12-31 release. Both remain in active production. The RX 9070's predecessor is Navi III, while the Z2 A GPU has no recorded predecessor, indicating a distinct product lineage. The RX 9070's launch MSRP of 549 USD is recorded in the database; the Z2 A GPU has no launch MSRP.

For users selecting between these two, the decision rests on the workload environment. Desktop gaming and compute tasks align with the RX 9070, which delivers 36.13 TFLOPS, 644.6 GB/s bandwidth, and 56 RT cores. Low-power embedded or handheld designs align with the Z2 A GPU, which operates at 15 W and provides 1.638 TFLOPS with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The database shows no scenario where the Z2 A GPU outperforms the RX 9070 in absolute performance metrics; its advantage is confined to power consumption and form factor flexibility.