AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows no direct head-to-head benchmark scores for these two parts, so the comparison rests entirely on the specification sheet and computed throughput figures. Even without measured frame rates, the raw compute deltas are decisive. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103 delivers 29.15 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is 17.8 times the 1.638 TFLOPS of the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU. That is not a marginal gap; it is a different performance class entirely.

The texture throughput tells a similar story. NVIDIA's part reaches 455.4 GTexel/s, while AMD's chip manages 51.20 GTexel/s. That is an 8.9x advantage for the RTX 4070 AD103. Pixel rate also favors NVIDIA heavily: 158.4 GPixel/s versus 25.60 GPixel/s, a 6.2x margin. In every raw throughput metric the database records, the NVIDIA part wins by a wide margin, which is expected given the TDP difference of 15 W versus 200 W.

Memory bandwidth is another area of separation. The RTX 4070 AD103 uses a 192-bit bus with GDDR6X memory to reach 504.2 GB/s. The Ryzen Z2 A GPU uses a 128-bit bus with LPDDR5 memory for 102.4 GB/s. That is a 4.9x bandwidth advantage for NVIDIA. The AMD part does have a larger memory pool at 16 GB versus 12 GB, but the bandwidth deficit will limit how effectively that capacity can be fed in compute-heavy workloads.

Clock speeds also differ substantially. The NVIDIA part boosts to 2475 MHz, while the AMD part boosts to 1600 MHz. The base clocks are 1920 MHz and 1000 MHz, respectively. Higher clocks, combined with more shading units (5888 versus 512), more texture mapping units (184 versus 32), and more ROPs (64 versus 16), create a compounding advantage for the RTX 4070 AD103.

Ray tracing hardware shows a similar pattern. NVIDIA integrates 46 RT cores, while AMD integrates 8. Tensor cores are present only on the NVIDIA side, with 184 of them, which enables AI-accelerated features that the AMD chip cannot match. The AMD part does support the same DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) API level, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so feature-level API compatibility is equal, but the hardware resources behind those APIs are vastly different.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different architectural families and different manufacturing processes. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU uses the Van Gogh chip with RDNA 2.0 architecture, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103 uses the AD103 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture, built on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. The process node difference gives NVIDIA a density advantage: 121.1 million transistors per square millimeter versus 14.7 million per square millimeter.

Transistor counts reflect the scale gap. The AD103 packs 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die. The Van Gogh chip contains 2,400 million transistors on a 163 mm² die. That is a 19.1x transistor count difference and a 2.3x die size difference. The density ratio is roughly 8.2x in favor of the NVIDIA part, which reflects both the newer process node and the much larger design.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The AMD part uses LPDDR5 memory, which is a low-power standard suited to integrated or mobile designs. The NVIDIA part uses GDDR6X, a high-bandwidth dedicated graphics memory. The bus widths are 128-bit and 192-bit, respectively. The AMD memory clock runs at 800 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective data rate, while the NVIDIA memory clock runs at 1313 MHz with 21 Gbps effective data rate.

Compute precision handling also differs. The AMD part achieves 3.277 TFLOPS FP16 with a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32. The NVIDIA part achieves 29.15 TFLOPS FP16 with a 1:1 ratio, meaning it does not halve throughput when switching to half precision. This makes the NVIDIA part more consistent across precision formats.

The NVIDIA chip includes tensor cores, which are absent from the AMD chip. It also has dedicated RT cores, 46 of them, versus AMD's 8. The AMD part has no tensor core field recorded. This architectural split means the RTX 4070 AD103 can accelerate deep learning inference and certain rendering features that the Ryzen Z2 A GPU cannot.

Power delivery differs sharply. The AMD part has a 15 W TDP and no power connector listed, indicating an integrated or low-power design. The NVIDIA part has a 200 W TDP, a dual-slot cooler, a single 16-pin power connector, and a suggested 550 W power supply. The physical footprint also differs: the RTX 4070 AD103 measures 240 mm in length, 110 mm in height, and 40 mm in width, while the AMD part has no dimensions recorded.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU wins on power efficiency and memory capacity. At 15 W TDP, it consumes a fraction of the power of the 200 W NVIDIA part. For battery-powered handhelds or compact consoles, that low power envelope is the defining characteristic. The 16 GB memory pool is also larger than the 12 GB on the NVIDIA part, which can matter for workloads that need large working sets rather than high bandwidth, though the LPDDR5 interface will limit sustained throughput.

The AMD part also wins on integration simplicity. It has a single USB Type-C display output and no external power connector requirement. The NVIDIA part needs a 16-pin connector and a 550 W power supply recommendation. The AMD chip is production status "Active," while the NVIDIA chip is marked "End-of-life," which may affect long-term availability.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103 wins on every raw performance metric in the database. It has 11.5 times the shading units, 5.75 times the TMUs, 4 times the ROPs, 5.75 times the RT cores, and 184 tensor cores where the AMD part has none. Its FP32 output is 17.8 times higher, its texture rate is 8.9 times higher, its pixel rate is 6.2 times higher, and its memory bandwidth is 4.9 times higher.

Clock speeds also favor NVIDIA, with a 54.7% higher boost clock (2475 MHz versus 1600 MHz) and a 92% higher base clock (1920 MHz versus 1000 MHz). The NVIDIA part supports PCIe 4.0 x16, while the AMD part has no bus interface recorded, suggesting a different connectivity path. Display outputs also differ: the NVIDIA part offers one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the AMD part has a single USB Type-C.

The release dates are close: the AMD part launched on December 31, 2024, and the NVIDIA part on February 29, 2024. The NVIDIA part has a recorded launch MSRP of 599 USD, which can be stated once as a factual reference point. The AMD part has no launch MSRP recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103 delivers 29.15 TFLOPS FP32, which is 17.8 times the 1.638 TFLOPS of the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU.

Q: How do the memory systems compare?

A: The AMD part uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA part uses 12 GB of GDDR6X on a 192-bit bus with 504.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has a 15 W TDP with no power connector listed. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103 has a 200 W TDP, uses a dual-slot cooler, requires a single 16-pin power connector, and has a suggested 550 W power supply.

Q: Does the AMD part have tensor cores?

A: No, the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has no tensor cores recorded. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103 includes 184 tensor cores.

Q: Which part has more ray tracing hardware?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103 has 46 RT cores, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has 8 RT cores.

Q: What are the process node and transistor counts?

A: The AMD part uses a 7 nm process at TSMC with 2,400 million transistors on a 163 mm² die. The NVIDIA part uses a 5 nm process at TSMC with 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103 |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Ada Lovelace |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 2,400 million | 45,900 million |

| Die Size | 163 mm² | 379 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 14.7M / mm² | 121.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 1920 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1600 MHz | 2475 MHz |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory Type | LPDDR5 | GDDR6X |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 102.4 GB/s | 504.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 512 | 5888 |

| TMUs | 32 | 184 |

| ROPs | 16 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 8 | 46 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 184 |

| Pixel Rate | 25.60 GPixel/s | 158.4 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 51.20 GTexel/s | 455.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 1.638 TFLOPS | 29.15 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 3.277 TFLOPS (2:1) | 29.15 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 15 W | 200 W |

| Slot Width | Not recorded | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | Not recorded | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Not recorded | 550 W |

| Bus Interface | Not recorded | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x USB Type-C | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Dimensions | Not recorded | 240 mm length, 110 mm height, 40 mm width |

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

| Release Date | 2024-12-31 | 2024-02-29 |

| Predecessor | Not recorded | GeForce 30 |

| Successor | Not recorded | GeForce 50 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | 599 USD |