AMD Radeon RX 9070 vs NVIDIA N1 16SM Comparison

The Verdict

The data places the AMD Radeon RX 9070 and the NVIDIA N1 16SM in entirely different performance classes. The RX 9070 posts an average benchmark score of 23877, while the N1 16SM has no recorded benchmark scores and sits at the 50th percentile of all GPUs. The RX 9070, by contrast, reaches the 69th percentile. The RX 9070 delivers 36.13 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput against 9.609 TFLOPS for the N1 16SM, a 3.8x gap in raw compute. Its pixel rate of 322.6 GPixel/s dwarfs the N1 16SM's 56.30 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 564.5 GTexel/s more than doubles the N1 16SM's 300.3 GTexel/s.

The N1 16SM is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no discrete power connectors and no TDP listed, while the RX 9070 is a dual-slot add-in card requiring a 550 W suggested PSU. The RX 9070 is the only one with any benchmark presence in the database, and its nearest rivals show a tight cluster: it sits 0.6% above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z, 1.1% above the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile, and 0.8% below the AMD Radeon RX 6800S. These deltas are small, indicating the RX 9070's performance is competitive with that group. For anyone building a discrete desktop gaming or compute system, the RX 9070 is the clear choice based on every measured metric. The N1 16SM, with its massive 128 GB memory pool and IGP form factor, serves a different purpose entirely, likely a system-on-chip for integrated graphics workloads, not a discrete GPU competitor.

Architecture Differences

The RX 9070 uses the Navi 48 chip built on RDNA 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It packs 53,900 million transistors into a 357 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 151.0M per mm². The N1 16SM uses the GB20B chip with Blackwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. Its die is larger at 382 mm², but its transistor count is listed as unknown, so no density figure is available.

The RX 9070 has 3584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 128 raster operations pipelines. It carries 56 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The N1 16SM has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and only 24 ROPs. It includes 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores, a notable difference since the RX 9070 has no tensor core count in the database. Clock behavior differs sharply: the RX 9070 runs at a 1330 MHz base and 2520 MHz boost, with a separate 2070 MHz game clock. The N1 16SM operates at a 741 MHz base and 2346 MHz boost, with no game clock listed.

Memory architecture splits them further. The RX 9070 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The N1 16SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X, also on a 256-bit bus, but only achieves 273.2 GB/s. The RX 9070's memory clock runs at 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective), while the N1 16SM's memory clock is 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective). The RX 9070 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1 16SM lists N/A for all three APIs, indicating no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support in the recorded data.

Physical design differs as well. The RX 9070 is a dual-slot card with two 8-pin power connectors, a 550 W suggested PSU, and a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface. Its display outputs include one HDMI 2.1b and three DisplayPort 2.1a connectors. The N1 16SM is an IGP with no slot width, no power connectors, and a single HDMI output. Both use PCIe 5.0 x16, but the N1 16SM's API support being N/A suggests it is not intended for standard desktop graphics workloads. The RX 9070 released on 2025-03-05 with a launch MSRP of 549 USD; the N1 16SM has a later release date of 2026-05-31 and no launch MSRP recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute throughput?

A: The RX 9070 delivers 36.13 TFLOPS of FP32 and FP16 (1:1) performance. The N1 16SM delivers 9.609 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16, also at a 1:1 ratio. The RX 9070 is approximately 3.8x faster in raw shader throughput.

Q: How do their memory configurations compare?

A: The RX 9070 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 644.6 GB/s bandwidth. The N1 16SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 9070 has more than double the bandwidth despite having one-eighth the capacity.

Q: What API support does each GPU offer?

A: The RX 9070 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1 16SM lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan in the database, indicating no standard graphics API support is recorded.

Q: How many ray tracing cores does each GPU have?

A: The RX 9070 has 56 ray tracing cores. The N1 16SM has 16 ray tracing cores. The RX 9070 has 3.5x more RT cores.

Q: What are the physical form factor differences?

A: The RX 9070 is a dual-slot discrete card with two 8-pin power connectors and a 550 W suggested PSU. The N1 16SM is an IGP with no power connectors and no TDP listed. The RX 9070 provides one HDMI 2.1b and three DisplayPort 2.1a outputs; the N1 16SM provides a single HDMI output.

Q: Which GPU has a higher percentile ranking?

A: The RX 9070 sits at the 69th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The N1 16SM sits at the 50th percentile, and it has no recorded benchmark scores, giving it an average benchmark score of 0.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field. Process node: the RX 9070 uses 4 nm, the N1 16SM uses 5 nm, both at TSMC. Transistor count: the RX 9070 has 53,900 million, the N1 16SM is unknown. Die size: the RX 9070 is 357 mm², the N1 16SM is 382 mm². Transistor density: the RX 9070 has 151.0M per mm², the N1 16SM has no recorded density.

Clock speeds: the RX 9070 has a 1330 MHz base, 2520 MHz boost, and 2070 MHz game clock. The N1 16SM has a 741 MHz base and 2346 MHz boost, with no game clock. Memory clocks: the RX 9070 runs at 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective), the N1 16SM at 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective). Memory capacity: 16 GB GDDR6 versus 128 GB LPDDR5X. Bandwidth: 644.6 GB/s versus 273.2 GB/s. Both use a 256-bit bus.

Compute units: the RX 9070 has 3584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 128 ROPs. The N1 16SM has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. Ray tracing cores: 56 versus 16. Tensor cores: the RX 9070 has none, the N1 16SM has 64. Pixel rate: 322.6 GPixel/s versus 56.30 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 564.5 GTexel/s versus 300.3 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16: 36.13 TFLOPS versus 9.609 TFLOPS.

Power and physical: the RX 9070 has a 220 W TDP, dual-slot width, two 8-pin connectors, and a 550 W suggested PSU. The N1 16SM has an unknown TDP, IGP slot width, no connectors, and no suggested PSU. Display outputs: one HDMI 2.1b plus three DisplayPort 2.1a versus a single HDMI. API support: the RX 9070 lists DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4; the N1 16SM lists N/A for all. Bus interface is identical at PCIe 5.0 x16. Release dates differ: 2025-03-05 for the RX 9070, 2026-05-31 for the N1 16SM. The RX 9070 has a launch MSRP of 549 USD; the N1 16SM has none.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between the RX 9070 and the N1 16SM. The N1 16SM has an empty benchmark array and an average benchmark score of 0. The RX 9070, however, has a full set of ten recorded benchmark scores. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 6290. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 131539, and in Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 58705. Passmark results span multiple DirectX versions: 141 in DirectX 10, 281 in DirectX 11, 74 in DirectX 12, and 343 in DirectX 9. Passmark G2D scores 1280, G3D scores 25381, and GPU Compute scores 14737. The RX 9070's average benchmark score across all tests is 23877.

The N1 16SM's lack of any benchmark data means no direct comparison is possible from recorded measurements. The RX 9070's nearest rivals provide context: it outperforms the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z by 0.6% (23736 average score), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile by 1.1% (23628 average score). It trails the AMD Radeon RX 6800S by 0.8% (24063) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER by 1.2% (24170). These small deltas place the RX 9070 in a tightly contested performance band, with all four rivals within 1.2% of its average score.

The RX 9070's 69th percentile ranking indicates it outperforms the majority of GPUs in the database, while the N1 16SM's 50th percentile with zero benchmark scores reflects its status as an unmeasured IGP. The RX 9070's 36.13 TFLOPS FP32 output versus the N1 16SM's 9.609 TFLOPS is the largest computational gap in the recorded data. Its pixel rate advantage, 322.6 GPixel/s versus 56.30 GPixel/s, is a 5.7x difference. The texture rate advantage, 564.5 GTexel/s versus 300.3 GTexel/s, is a 1.9x difference. The RX 9070 also has 3584 shading units versus 2048, 224 TMUs versus 128, and 128 ROPs versus 24.

Memory bandwidth favors the RX 9070 at 644.6 GB/s versus 273.2 GB/s, a 2.4x advantage, despite the N1 16SM's much larger 128 GB capacity. The RX 9070's 16 GB GDDR6 configuration is typical for a discrete gaming card, while the N1 16SM's 128 GB LPDDR5X pool suggests a different use case entirely, likely unified memory for an integrated processor. The API support difference reinforces this: the N1 16SM has no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support recorded, while the RX 9070 supports all three. The RX 9070's boost clock of 2520 MHz is 174 MHz higher than the N1 16SM's 2346 MHz boost, and its base clock of 1330 MHz is 589 MHz higher than the N1 16SM's 741 MHz base.

The RX 9070 wins every measurable compute, rasterization, and memory bandwidth category. The N1 16SM wins only in memory capacity (128 GB versus 16 GB) and tensor core count (64 versus none). The RX 9070's transistor density of 151.0M per mm² on a 4 nm node versus the N1 16SM's 5 nm node with unknown transistor count indicates a more advanced manufacturing process. The RX 9070's 220 W TDP and dual-slot design are consistent with a discrete performance GPU, while the N1 16SM's IGP form factor and no power connectors indicate an integrated solution. The data shows no scenario where the N1 16SM outperforms the RX 9070 in standard GPU benchmarks, as none are recorded for the N1 16SM.