AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile Comparison

# AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile

The data presents a stark generational and architectural gap. AMD's Radeon RX Vega M GH, an end-of-life integrated GPU from 2018 built on a 14 nm process, is decisively outperformed by NVIDIA's GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile, an active 2023 part manufactured on a 5 nm node. The benchmark results show the RTX 4070 Mobile winning both head-to-head tests by margins exceeding 70%, yet the percentile rankings remain surprisingly close, with the AMD part at the 74th percentile and NVIDIA at the 73rd percentile. This discrepancy invites deeper investigation into what each score represents and how these two very different mobile graphics solutions stack up across their respective benchmark suites.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two available head-to-head comparisons leave no ambiguity about the victor. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH scores 27,125 points, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile achieves 109,197 points. That is a delta of -75.2% in favor of NVIDIA, meaning the RTX 4070 Mobile delivers roughly four times the raw compute performance in this particular workload. The margin is enormous, and it reflects the fundamental differences in shader throughput and memory bandwidth between the two designs.

The Geekbench Vulkan result tells a similar story, though with a slightly narrower gap. The AMD part scores 31,268, while NVIDIA reaches 108,367, a delta of -71.1%. Interestingly, the Vega M GH performs better relative to itself in Vulkan than in OpenCL, suggesting that its GCN 4.0 architecture handles the lower-level API more efficiently. However, even with that relative improvement, the RTX 4070 Mobile still maintains a commanding lead of over 77,000 points. The NVIDIA GPU's advantage is consistent across both API tests, and no benchmark in the head-to-head set favors the AMD product.

What makes these results particularly striking is the context of the average benchmark scores. The Vega M GH has an average score of 29,197 across all its benchmarks, while the RTX 4070 Mobile averages 27,435. That means the AMD part actually holds a slight edge in its overall average, despite losing both head-to-head tests decisively. This paradox is explained by the fact that the NVIDIA GPU's benchmark suite includes nine separate tests, several of which are low-scoring DirectX legacy tests (PassMark DirectX 9 at 223, DirectX 10 at 116, DirectX 11 at 179, DirectX 12 at 85), which drag down its average. The AMD part only has two benchmarks, both of which are modern API tests. So while the head-to-head data shows NVIDIA dominating, the overall average paints a more nuanced picture of where each GPU excels.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the wins column, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile wins both head-to-head benchmarks, giving it a perfect 2-0 record. That is the entirety of the direct comparison data. The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH has zero head-to-head wins. However, the broader benchmark data reveals that the AMD part's two scores—27,125 in OpenCL and 31,268 in Vulkan—are both respectable in absolute terms, placing it at the 74th percentile of all GPUs. The RTX 4070 Mobile, despite its massive head-to-head victories, sits at the 73rd percentile, one point lower.

This suggests that while the RTX 4070 Mobile is clearly superior in raw compute-heavy workloads like OpenCL and Vulkan, the Vega M GH holds its own in the average benchmark computation. The AMD GPU's nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro W8000 (average score 29,211, delta 0%), Intel Arc A370M (29,175, delta 0.1%), AMD Radeon RX 470 (28,996, delta 0.7%), and AMD Radeon RX 6800M (28,874, delta 1.1%). These are all within a 1.1% band of the Vega M GH's average, indicating that it competes in the same performance tier as those parts.

For the RTX 4070 Mobile, its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT (average 27,425, delta 0%), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 (27,565, delta -0.5%), NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell (27,135, delta 1.1%), and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 (27,839, delta -1.5%). The performance deltas here are also tight, but the company it keeps is far more impressive—the RTX 3090 is a flagship desktop card, and the RX 6700 XT is a high-end desktop part. The data indicates that the RTX 4070 Mobile's average score, while numerically lower than the Vega M GH's, is achieved across a much wider range of workloads, including older DirectX versions where the AMD GPU has no comparable data.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational. The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH uses the Polaris 22 chip, built on GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 5,000 million transistors on a 208 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.0 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile, in contrast, uses the AD106 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture, built on TSMC's 5 nm process. It contains 22,900 million transistors on a slightly smaller 188 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 121.8 million per square millimeter—over five times denser than the AMD part.

Memory configurations differ fundamentally. The Vega M GH uses 4 GB of HBM2 on a 1024-bit bus, delivering 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 4070 Mobile uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, achieving 256.0 GB/s. Despite having one-eighth the bus width, NVIDIA's part provides 25% more bandwidth thanks to faster memory (16 Gbps effective versus 1600 Mbps effective for AMD). The memory clock speeds tell the story: AMD runs at 800 MHz base with 1600 Mbps effective, while NVIDIA runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective.

Compute resources are heavily skewed toward NVIDIA. The RTX 4070 Mobile has 4,608 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs, compared to AMD's 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. NVIDIA also includes 36 ray tracing cores and 144 tensor cores, features entirely absent from the AMD part. The clock speeds favor NVIDIA as well: 1395 MHz base and 1695 MHz boost versus AMD's 1063 MHz base and 1190 MHz boost. This translates to 15.62 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 performance for NVIDIA, versus 3.656 TFLOPS for AMD—a 4.3x advantage in raw compute.

Power and interface also differ. AMD's TDP is 100 W, while NVIDIA's is 115 W. Both are listed as IGP (integrated graphics processor) with portable device-dependent display outputs. However, NVIDIA uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, while AMD uses an IGP bus interface with no power connectors listed. NVIDIA supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6. AMD supports DirectX 12 (12_0), Vulkan 1.3, and OpenGL 4.6. The DirectX version gap is significant—12_2 includes features like mesh shaders and DXR that 12_0 cannot access.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH has an average benchmark score of 29,197, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile averages 27,435. However, the NVIDIA part's average is computed across nine benchmarks, including legacy DirectX tests, while AMD's is based on only two modern API tests.

Q: How large is the performance gap in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RTX 4070 Mobile scores 109,197 in Geekbench OpenCL compared to 27,125 for the Vega M GH, a delta of -75.2% in NVIDIA's favor. This represents roughly a fourfold difference in raw compute performance.

Q: Does the AMD GPU win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. The data shows the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile winning both head-to-head benchmarks (Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan), giving it 2 wins and the AMD part 0 wins.

Q: What are the transistor density differences?

A: The RTX 4070 Mobile has a transistor density of 121.8 million per square millimeter on its 5 nm TSMC process, while the Vega M GH has 24.0 million per square millimeter on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process. That is a 5x density advantage for NVIDIA.

Q: Does the RTX 4070 Mobile support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the RTX 4070 Mobile includes 36 ray tracing cores and 144 tensor cores, and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The AMD Vega M GH has no ray tracing cores or tensor cores and only supports DirectX 12 (12_0).

Q: How do memory bandwidths compare?

A: The RTX 4070 Mobile provides 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth via 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, while the Vega M GH provides 204.8 GB/s via 4 GB of HBM2 on a 1024-bit bus. NVIDIA achieves higher bandwidth with a much narrower bus.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile is the superior GPU in every head-to-head benchmark, with deltas of -75.2% and -71.1% in OpenCL and Vulkan respectively. If raw compute performance is the priority, the choice is clear. The RTX 4070 Mobile also brings architectural features the AMD part lacks entirely—ray tracing cores, tensor cores, and DirectX 12 Ultimate support—which future-proofs it for modern workloads.

However, the percentile data complicates the narrative. The Vega M GH sits at the 74th percentile while the RTX 4070 Mobile sits at the 73rd. This suggests that in the broader context of all GPUs, the AMD part holds up surprisingly well, likely because its average score is based on fewer, higher-scoring benchmarks. The AMD GPU also has a lower TDP (100 W versus 115 W), which could be relevant in power-constrained mobile designs.

For users who prioritize modern API support, ray tracing, tensor-based workloads, and higher memory capacity (8 GB versus 4 GB), the RTX 4070 Mobile is the only rational choice. For those focused on general compute benchmarks and lower power consumption, the Vega M GH's data shows it remains competitive in its tier, trading blows with parts like the Intel Arc A370M and AMD Radeon RX 470. The RTX 4070 Mobile, meanwhile, is positioned alongside the desktop-class RTX 3090 and RX 6700 XT in average score, proof of its mobile efficiency.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile |

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

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Ada Lovelace |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 5 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 5,000 million | 22,900 million |

| Die Size | 208 mm² | 188 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.0M / mm² | 121.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1063 MHz | 1395 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1190 MHz | 1695 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 800 MHz / 1600 Mbps effective | 2000 MHz / 16 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM2 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 1024 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 204.8 GB/s | 256.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1536 | 4608 |

| TMUs | 96 | 144 |

| ROPs | 64 | 48 |

| RT Cores | None | 36 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 144 |

| Pixel Rate | 76.16 GPixel/s | 81.36 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 114.2 GTexel/s | 244.1 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 3.656 TFLOPS | 15.62 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 3.656 TFLOPS (1:1) | 15.62 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 100 W | 115 W |

| Bus Interface | IGP | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.3 | 1.4 |

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

| Release Date | 2018-01-31 | 2023-01-02 |

| Predecessor | None listed | GeForce 30 Mobile |

| Successor | None listed | GeForce 50 Mobile |