Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER Comparison

The Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER occupy different corners of the GPU market, yet their specifications and benchmark data allow for a direct comparison. The Intel part, based on the Ponte Vecchio chip, is a data center accelerator with a massive memory pool and compute throughput, while the NVIDIA card is a consumer-oriented Blackwell design. The recorded database shows no shared head-to-head benchmark results, and the Intel part has no benchmark scores or rival entries. The NVIDIA card, however, has one recorded 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 6269.5, placing it in the 36th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 with an average score of 6270 and a delta of 0%, the NVIDIA Quadro K620 at 6282 (-0.2%), the AMD FirePro W600 at 6223 (+0.8%), and the AMD Radeon R7 M350 at 6327 (-0.9%). These numbers show that the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER performs within a narrow band of these older or differently positioned cards, with a spread of less than 2% across all four rivals.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

No direct benchmark comparison exists in the database for these two products. The Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem lists no benchmark scores, no average score, and no nearest rivals, which means its recorded performance profile is empty. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER does carry a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result of 6269.5 points. That score positions it at the 36th percentile of all GPUs, indicating that roughly two-thirds of all recorded graphics cards score higher in this particular test. The absence of any Intel benchmark data prevents a direct numerical head-to-head, so the comparison must rely on architectural and specification differences.

The NVIDIA card’s nearest rival data provides context for its performance. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 matches it exactly with an average score of 6270 and a delta of 0%, meaning the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER is statistically identical in this workload. The Quadro K620 scores 6282, which is 0.2% higher, a negligible margin. The FirePro W600 scores 6223, which is 0.8% lower, and the Radeon R7 M350 scores 6327, which is 0.9% higher. These deltas are all under 1%, so the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER delivers performance that is effectively indistinguishable from these four rivals in the Steel Nomad test. The data indicates that the card’s raw DX12 performance is not exceptional relative to its peer group, despite its modern architecture.

For the Intel part, the database records zero wins in any head-to-head benchmark. The NVIDIA card also records zero wins, as the head-to-head benchmark array is empty for both. This lack of data means that any statement about which part wins a specific test cannot be based on measured results. Instead, the specification sheet offers a basis for theoretical analysis. The Intel GPU Max Subsystem has a peak FP32 rate of 52.43 TFLOPS, while the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER has 43.94 TFLOPS. That is an 8.49 TFLOPS advantage for Intel, or roughly 19% higher. The texture rate for Intel is 1,638.4 GTexel/s versus 686.6 GTexel/s for NVIDIA, a gap of 951.8 GTexel/s, meaning Intel processes about 2.4 times more texels per second. These figures suggest that in compute-heavy and texture-bound workloads, the Intel part would likely outperform, but no benchmark confirms this.

The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER counters with a pixel rate of 235.4 GPixel/s, while the Intel part lists 0 MPixel/s. That is a complete absence of rasterization throughput for Intel, which means it cannot perform traditional pixel shading. The NVIDIA card also has 96 ROPs, while Intel has 0, reinforcing that the Intel part is not designed for display or raster workloads. The NVIDIA card’s boost clock of 2452 MHz is substantially higher than Intel’s 1600 MHz, but clock speed alone does not determine overall performance due to architectural differences. The recorded data shows no direct test where these two meet, so the head-to-head section must conclude that no measured wins exist for either side.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split between these two products. The Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem is a compute-oriented accelerator with 128 GB of HBM2e memory and a 3.21 TB/s memory bandwidth. It targets workloads that require large memory capacities and high throughput, such as scientific computing or AI training. The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER, with 16 GB of GDDR7 memory and 896.0 GB/s bandwidth, is a consumer graphics card designed for rasterization and real-time rendering. Its single benchmark score of 6269.5 places it in the 36th percentile, which means it is not a top-tier performer in the database’s overall rankings. The nearest rival data shows it matches the older RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 exactly, so it does not offer a generational leap in this specific test.

For a user who needs maximum memory capacity and compute density, the Intel part is the only choice based on the recorded specifications. It offers 112 GB more memory than the NVIDIA card, and its bandwidth is 3.58 times higher. For a user who needs a display output, the NVIDIA card is the only option, as the Intel part has no outputs. The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER supports 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b, while the Intel part lists none. The NVIDIA card also has a lower power draw at 350 W versus 2400 W for Intel, which is a significant operational difference, though the exact implications for performance per watt are not recorded.

The benchmark percentile for the NVIDIA card at 36% indicates that it sits below the median of all GPUs in the database. That is a surprising result for a modern Blackwell part, but the data is what it is. The Intel part has no percentile recorded, so its relative standing is unknown. The verdict from the data is that these are not competitors in the same segment. The Intel part is a server accelerator with no consumer features, while the NVIDIA card is a consumer GPU with a modest benchmark showing. A user building a workstation for rendering would pick the NVIDIA card. A user deploying a data center compute node would pick the Intel part. The database offers no evidence that either could substitute for the other.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem uses the Ponte Vecchio chip, built on a 10 nm process at Intel’s foundry. The architecture is Generation 12.5, which is Intel’s Xe-HPC design. The die size is 1280 mm², and the chip contains 100,000 million transistors. The transistor density is 78.1 million per mm². The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER uses the GB203 chip, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The architecture is Blackwell 2.0, part of the GeForce 50-series. The die size is 378 mm², and the chip contains 45,600 million transistors. The transistor density is 120.6 million per mm². The NVIDIA chip is smaller, denser, and uses a more advanced process node. The Intel chip is larger and less dense, but it packs more than double the transistor count.

The Intel part has 16,384 shading units, 1,024 TMUs, and 0 ROPs. It also has 128 RT cores but no tensor cores listed. The NVIDIA card has 8,960 shading units, 280 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. It has 70 RT cores and 280 tensor cores. The NVIDIA part has a higher pixel rate at 235.4 GPixel/s, while Intel has 0. The texture rate favors Intel at 1,638.4 GTexel/s versus 686.6 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute rates are 52.43 TFLOPS for Intel and 43.94 TFLOPS for NVIDIA. Both parts have FP16 rates identical to their FP32 rates, indicating a 1:1 ratio. The NVIDIA card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while Intel supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6. NVIDIA supports Vulkan 1.4, while Intel lists no Vulkan support. These architectural differences show that Intel focuses on raw compute and memory throughput, while NVIDIA focuses on rasterization and feature completeness.

The memory architecture also differs fundamentally. Intel uses 128 GB of HBM2e on an 8192-bit bus, yielding 3.21 TB/s bandwidth. NVIDIA uses 16 GB of GDDR7 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 896.0 GB/s. The Intel memory clock is 1565 MHz (3.1 Gbps effective), while NVIDIA’s is 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective). The effective data rate for NVIDIA is much higher per pin, but the wider bus on Intel gives it a massive total bandwidth advantage. The Intel part has no display outputs, confirming its role as a compute accelerator. NVIDIA has four display outputs. The Intel part is a dual-slot card with a 267 mm length, while NVIDIA is also dual-slot but longer at 304 mm, with a height of 137 mm and width of 48 mm.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ on nearly every specification field. The process node is 10 nm for Intel and 5 nm for NVIDIA. The transistor count is 100,000 million for Intel versus 45,600 million for NVIDIA. The die size is 1280 mm² versus 378 mm². The base clock is 900 MHz for Intel and 2295 MHz for NVIDIA. The boost clock is 1600 MHz for Intel and 2452 MHz for NVIDIA. The memory size is 128 GB versus 16 GB. The memory type is HBM2e versus GDDR7. The bus width is 8192 bit versus 256 bit. The bandwidth is 3.21 TB/s versus 896.0 GB/s. The shading units are 16,384 versus 8,960. The TMUs are 1,024 versus 280. The ROPs are 0 versus 96. The RT cores are 128 versus 70. The tensor cores are null for Intel and 280 for NVIDIA. The pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s versus 235.4 GPixel/s. The texture rate is 1,638.4 GTexel/s versus 686.6 GTexel/s. The FP32 is 52.43 TFLOPS versus 43.94 TFLOPS. The FP16 is 52.43 TFLOPS versus 43.94 TFLOPS. The TDP is 2400 W versus 350 W. The power connector is 1x 16-pin for both, but Intel has a suggested PSU of 2800 W while NVIDIA has none listed. The bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16 for both. The display outputs are none for Intel and 1x HDMI 2.1b plus 3x DisplayPort 2.1b for NVIDIA. The DirectX version is 12 (12_1) versus 12 Ultimate (12_2). The Vulkan version is null versus 1.4. The release date is 2023-01-09 for Intel and 2025-12-31 for NVIDIA. The Intel part has a successor named H3C Graphics, while NVIDIA has no successor listed.

FAQ

Q: Does the Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem have any benchmark scores in the database?

A: No. The database records no benchmark scores for the Intel part, and its average benchmark score is 0. It also has no nearest rivals listed.

Q: What is the recorded benchmark performance of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER?

A: The NVIDIA card has a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 6269.5. Its average benchmark score is 6270, and it sits in the 36th percentile of all GPUs.

Q: How does the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER matches the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 exactly with a delta of 0%. It is 0.2% slower than the Quadro K620, 0.8% faster than the FirePro W600, and 0.9% slower than the Radeon R7 M350.

Q: Which card has more memory?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem has 128 GB of HBM2e memory, while the NVIDIA card has 16 GB of GDDR7 memory. The Intel part has 112 GB more memory.

Q: Can the Intel card output video to a display?

A: No. The Intel part lists no display outputs. The NVIDIA card has 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Intel part has a TDP of 2400 W and a suggested PSU of 2800 W. The NVIDIA card has a TDP of 350 W and no suggested PSU listed.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem wins in every category related to memory capacity and raw compute throughput. Its 128 GB memory size dwarfs the NVIDIA card’s 16 GB, making it suitable for datasets that exceed the NVIDIA card’s capacity. Its 3.21 TB/s bandwidth is 3.58 times higher than the NVIDIA card’s 896.0 GB/s, which benefits memory-bound workloads. Its FP32 rate of 52.43 TFLOPS is 19% higher than the NVIDIA card’s 43.94 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 1,638.4 GTexel/s is more than double the NVIDIA card’s 686.6 GTexel/s. The Intel part also has more shading units (16,384 versus 8,960) and more RT cores (128 versus 70). These specs indicate that the Intel part is designed for compute tasks where massive parallelism and memory access are critical.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER wins in every category related to display output and rasterization. It has 96 ROPs and a pixel rate of 235.4 GPixel/s, while the Intel part has 0 in both. The NVIDIA card has 280 tensor cores, while the Intel part lists none. The NVIDIA card supports Vulkan 1.4, while Intel has no Vulkan support. The NVIDIA card also has a much higher boost clock at 2452 MHz versus 1600 MHz, which contributes to its raster performance. The NVIDIA card is also more power-efficient, with a TDP of 350 W versus 2400 W. The NVIDIA card’s launch MSRP is 749 USD, which is a recorded fact, though no price comparison is possible because the Intel part has no launch MSRP.

The recorded benchmark data shows that the NVIDIA card performs at a level comparable to the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102, meaning it does not break new ground in DX12 performance. The Intel part has no recorded performance, so its actual benchmark behavior is unverified. The specification sheet, however, suggests that the Intel part would dominate in compute-heavy, non-visual workloads. The NVIDIA card is the only option for any task requiring a display, such as gaming or workstation graphics. The data does not support a single overall winner; each part wins in its intended domain. The Intel part is for data center compute, and the NVIDIA card is for consumer graphics.