AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER Comparison

AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER occupy opposite ends of the GPU spectrum, one designed as a low-power console component and the other as a high-performance desktop add-in card. The recorded data shows a massive gap in compute resources, memory bandwidth, and benchmark scores, yet the Z2 Go's existence raises questions about efficiency and form factor that raw performance numbers do not answer. This analysis breaks down where each part wins, how their architectures diverge, and what the measurements imply for different use cases.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4070 SUPER wins every single recorded benchmark comparison by default, since the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has no benchmark entries in the database. The NVIDIA card's average benchmark score of 43223 places it in the 83rd percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD part sits at the 50th percentile with an average score of 0. This means the Z2 Go cannot compete on raw throughput in any tested workload, but its design goals point elsewhere. The Z2 Go's 28 W TDP and lack of power connectors indicate a part intended for ultra-portable or embedded systems where power draw and physical footprint matter more than frame rates. The RTX 4070 SUPER, with its 220 W TDP, 267 mm length, and 16-pin connector, targets desktop builds with ample cooling and power delivery. The data suggests the Z2 Go wins on integration flexibility and power efficiency, while the RTX 4070 SUPER wins on every performance metric.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs share the same DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 API support, but their underlying architectures could not be more different. The AMD chip uses RDNA 2.0 architecture on a 6 nm TSMC process, codenamed Rembrandt+, with 13,100 million transistors packed into a 208 mm² die. The NVIDIA chip uses Ada Lovelace architecture on a 5 nm TSMC process, with 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. Transistor density tells the story: the RTX 4070 SUPER achieves 121.8M transistors per mm² versus the Z2 Go's 63.0M per mm², reflecting the newer process node and denser design.

The Z2 Go's feature set includes 12 ray tracing cores but no tensor cores, while the RTX 4070 SUPER includes 56 RT cores and 224 tensor cores. This tensor core presence gives the NVIDIA part dedicated hardware for AI-accelerated workloads, a capability the AMD part lacks entirely. The Z2 Go's FP16 throughput of 8.294 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio suggests mixed-precision capability, but the RTX 4070 SUPER delivers 35.48 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, meaning it processes half-precision at full rate without compromise. The AMD part's memory subsystem uses LPDDR5 with a 128-bit bus, while the NVIDIA part uses GDDR6X with a 192-bit bus, a difference that profoundly impacts bandwidth.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The RTX 4070 SUPER delivers 35.48 TFLOPS FP32 versus the Z2 Go's 4.147 TFLOPS FP32, an 8.5x advantage in single-precision throughput.

Q: How do memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The RTX 4070 SUPER offers 504.2 GB/s from its GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus, while the Z2 Go provides 102.4 GB/s from LPDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, roughly a 5x difference.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Z2 Go has a 28 W TDP and requires no power connectors, while the RTX 4070 SUPER has a 220 W TDP, requires a 16-pin connector, and suggests a 550 W power supply.

Q: Does the AMD part support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the Z2 Go includes 12 RT cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, though its RT capability is far smaller than the 56 RT cores found in the RTX 4070 SUPER.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The Z2 Go is listed as Active production, while the RTX 4070 SUPER is marked End-of-life, with its successor listed as GeForce 50.

Q: How do the benchmark scores compare?

A: The RTX 4070 SUPER averages 43223 across its recorded benchmarks, while the Z2 Go has no benchmark entries and an average score of 0, placing it at the 50th percentile versus the NVIDIA card's 83rd percentile.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every measurable specification. The Z2 Go uses 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, while the RTX 4070 SUPER uses 7168 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. Pixel and texture rates reflect this gap: the NVIDIA part achieves 198.0 GPixel/s and 554.4 GTexel/s, while the AMD part manages 86.40 GPixel/s and 129.6 GTexel/s. Memory configuration diverges sharply, with the Z2 Go offering 16 GB of LPDDR5 versus 12 GB of GDDR6X, though the AMD part's larger capacity comes with far less bandwidth.

Clock speeds tell a nuanced story. The Z2 Go has a higher boost clock at 2700 MHz versus the RTX 4070 SUPER's 2475 MHz, but its base clock sits much lower at 800 MHz versus 1980 MHz. The NVIDIA card's memory runs at 1313 MHz with 21 Gbps effective speed, while the AMD part's memory runs at 800 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective. Physical specifications differ completely: the RTX 4070 SUPER is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm by 112 mm by 42 mm, while the Z2 Go has no listed dimensions, suggesting an integrated or mobile form factor. Display outputs also differ, with the Z2 Go offering a single USB Type-C port and the RTX 4070 SUPER providing 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Since the Z2 Go has no recorded benchmark scores, the head-to-head comparison relies entirely on the RTX 4070 SUPER's results and its nearest rivals context. The NVIDIA card's strongest recorded result comes from Geekbench Vulkan with a score of 205624, followed by Geekbench OpenCL at 172795. In Passmark tests, the GPU scores 29995 in G3D, 17108 in GPU compute, 1184 in G2D, 344 in DirectX 9, 273 in DirectX 11, 167 in DirectX 10, and 110 in DirectX 12. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 4627.

The RTX 4070 SUPER's nearest rivals in the database provide context for its positioning. The Quadro M6000 24 GB scores 43262, a delta of -0.1% from the RTX card's 43223 average. The GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile scores 43268, also -0.1% behind. The Quadro M6000 scores 43301, -0.2% behind, and the RTX 4090 Mobile scores 43667, putting it 1% ahead. This clustering within a 1% range indicates the RTX 4070 SUPER sits in a tightly contested performance tier, with mobile and workstation parts trading places at the margin. Against the Z2 Go, the comparison is less about margin and more about categorical difference: the RTX 4070 SUPER produces measurable scores across all test suites, while the Z2 Go produces none.

The Verdict

The recorded data indicates two products with divergent purposes. The RTX 4070 SUPER is a high-throughput desktop GPU that delivers 35.48 TFLOPS FP32, 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth, and 56 RT cores, ranking in the 83rd percentile of all GPUs. Its benchmark scores place it within 1% of the Quadro M6000 24 GB, RTX 5050 Mobile, Quadro M6000, and RTX 4090 Mobile, confirming competitive performance in its tier. The Z2 Go, with 4.147 TFLOPS FP32, 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, and 12 RT cores, targets a different segment entirely, evidenced by its 28 W TDP, no power connectors, and single USB Type-C output.

The Z2 Go's 16 GB LPDDR5 memory exceeds the RTX 4070 SUPER's 12 GB GDDR6X capacity, but the bandwidth deficit of 102.4 GB/s versus 504.2 GB/s limits what that capacity can accomplish. The AMD part's higher boost clock of 2700 MHz versus 2475 MHz does not compensate for its far lower shading unit count of 768 versus 7168. Users requiring maximum frame rates, ray tracing performance, or AI compute should select the RTX 4070 SUPER, as its tensor cores and RT cores provide hardware acceleration the Z2 Go lacks. Users prioritizing minimal power draw, compact integration, and active production status should consider the Z2 Go, which remains in production while the RTX 4070 SUPER has reached end-of-life. The data does not support any performance equivalence between these parts, but it does support a clear division of purpose: the RTX 4070 SUPER for demanding desktop workloads, the Z2 Go for power-constrained embedded or portable systems.