NVIDIA A2 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 and NVIDIA A2 occupy opposite ends of NVIDIA’s product spectrum, yet both are currently end-of-life. The RTX 4070 is a mainstream consumer graphics card built on Ada Lovelace, aimed at high-refresh gaming and general compute, while the A2 is a low-power Ampere accelerator designed for compact, energy-constrained server deployments. Benchmark data shows a stark performance gap: the RTX 4070 dominates in both available compute tests, but the A2 counters with a smaller physical footprint, 60 W power draw, and 16 GB of memory. This analysis compares the two strictly on recorded specifications and benchmark results.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 scores 154,858 versus the A2’s 35,357, a 338% advantage for the RTX 4070.

Q: How does the A2 compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The RTX 4070 scores 174,152 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 411.9% higher than the A2’s 34,023. The A2 wins zero head-to-head benchmarks.

Q: What are the memory capacities of these two cards?

A: The A2 has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, while the RTX 4070 has 12 GB of GDDR6X on a 192-bit bus. The RTX 4070’s bandwidth is 504.2 GB/s versus 200.1 GB/s for the A2.

Q: Which card has a lower power consumption rating?

A: The A2 has a 60 W TDP and requires no external power connectors, while the RTX 4070 has a 200 W TDP and uses a single 16-pin connector. The A2’s suggested PSU is 250 W, compared to 550 W for the RTX 4070.

Q: Do both cards support the same modern APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Their API feature sets are identical, though the underlying architectures differ.

Q: What is the physical size difference?

A: The RTX 4070 is a dual-slot card measuring 240 mm in length, 110 mm in height, and 40 mm in width. The A2 is a single-slot card with no listed dimensions, making it the more compact option.

Architecture Differences

The RTX 4070 uses the AD104 chip built on TSMC’s 5 nm process, packing 35,800 million transistors into a 294 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 121.8M per mm². The A2, in contrast, uses the GA107 chip on Samsung’s 8 nm node, with 8,700 million transistors across a 200 mm² die, giving a density of 43.5M per mm². The RTX 4070’s node advantage is clear: it crams over four times more transistors into only 47% more die area.

Compute resources differ dramatically. The RTX 4070 has 5,888 shading units, 184 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs, while the A2 has 1,280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RTX 4070 also carries 46 ray tracing cores and 184 tensor cores; the A2 has 10 RT cores and 40 tensor cores. These specs translate to raw throughput: the RTX 4070 delivers 29.15 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16, while the A2 manages 4.531 TFLOPS in both precisions.

Memory architecture is another divergence. The RTX 4070 uses 12 GB of GDDR6X across a 192-bit bus, with memory clocked at 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective), producing 504.2 GB/s bandwidth. The A2 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a narrower 128-bit bus, with memory at 1563 MHz (12.5 Gbps effective), yielding 200.1 GB/s. The RTX 4070’s pixel rate is 158.4 GPixel/s and texture rate is 455.4 GTexel/s; the A2’s are 56.64 GPixel/s and 70.80 GTexel/s, respectively.

Physical design and interface also differ. The RTX 4070 is dual-slot, uses PCIe 4.0 x16, and has display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a). The A2 is single-slot, runs on PCIe 4.0 x8, and has no display outputs. The A2 requires no power connectors, while the RTX 4070 needs a 16-pin connection. The RTX 4070’s TDP is 200 W versus the A2’s 60 W. Both cards are end-of-life; the RTX 4070 released on 2023-04-11, and the A2 on 2021-11-09.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data includes two Geekbench tests, and the RTX 4070 wins both decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 4070 scores 154,858 against the A2’s 35,357, a 338% lead. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 4070 posts 174,152 versus the A2’s 34,023, a 411.9% advantage. The RTX 4070 therefore holds 2 wins and 0 losses. These deltas are not incremental; they represent an order-of-magnitude gap in raw compute throughput.

The RTX 4070’s average benchmark score across all tests is 37,648, placing it in the 81st percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla P4 (37,628, 0.1% behind), AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (37,507, 0.4% behind), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile (38,135, 1.3% ahead), and AMD Radeon PRO W6400 (37,157, 1.3% behind). This shows the RTX 4070 sits in a tightly packed band of mid-range performers, where a few percent separates it from competitors.

The A2’s average benchmark score is 34,690, placing it in the 79th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA T1000 8 GB (34,561, 0.4% behind), AMD Radeon HD 7970 (34,541, 0.4% behind), NVIDIA TITAN V (34,355, 1% behind), and NVIDIA RTX A1000 (34,207, 1.4% behind). Although the A2 ranks lower in average score, its percentile is only 2 points below the RTX 4070, reflecting the dense clustering of GPUs at this performance tier.

In individual tests where both cards have data, the RTX 4070’s dominance is consistent. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 154,858 is more than four times the A2’s, and its Vulkan score is over five times higher. The A2’s only listed benchmark results are these two Geekbench tests, and it loses both. The RTX 4070 also has additional benchmark results (3DMark Steel Nomad, PassMark suites) that the A2 lacks entirely, further widening the practical performance gap.

The Verdict

The data points to a single conclusion for compute-heavy workloads: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 is the superior performer. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks by margins of 338% and 411.9%, offers 29.15 TFLOPS FP32 versus the A2’s 4.531 TFLOPS, and delivers 504.2 GB/s memory bandwidth versus 200.1 GB/s. Its higher average benchmark score (37,648 vs 34,690) and higher percentile (81 vs 79) reinforce this, though the percentile gap is modest due to clustering. For any task that stresses shader throughput, ray tracing, or tensor cores, the RTX 4070 is the clear choice.

However, the A2 has specific advantages that matter in constrained environments. Its 60 W TDP is one-third of the RTX 4070’s 200 W, and it needs no external power connectors, making it viable in low-power servers. Its 16 GB memory capacity exceeds the RTX 4070’s 12 GB, which could benefit workloads requiring larger datasets that fit in VRAM. The A2’s single-slot design and lack of display outputs suggest it is intended for headless inference or edge deployments, where the RTX 4070’s dual-slot footprint and display connectivity are irrelevant.

The choice depends on the use case. If raw performance, higher bandwidth, and display output are required, the RTX 4070 wins without qualification. If power efficiency, compactness, and memory capacity are the priorities, the A2 serves a niche the RTX 4070 cannot. The RTX 4070’s launch MSRP is 599 USD; the A2 has no listed launch MSRP. Both are end-of-life, but the RTX 4070’s newer release (2023 vs 2021) and larger transistor count suggest longer relevance in performance-oriented systems. For most buyers, the RTX 4070 is the better GPU; the A2 is a specialized accelerator for specific low-power server roles.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 | NVIDIA A2 |

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

| Chip | AD104 | GA107 |

| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | Ampere |

| Process node | 5 nm (TSMC) | 8 nm (Samsung) |

| Transistors | 35,800 million | 8,700 million |

| Die size | 294 mm² | 200 mm² |

| Transistor density | 121.8M / mm² | 43.5M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1920 MHz | 1440 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2475 MHz | 1770 MHz |

| Memory clock | 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective) | 1563 MHz (12.5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory size | 12 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory type | GDDR6X | GDDR6 |

| Memory bus width | 192 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 504.2 GB/s | 200.1 GB/s |

| Shading units | 5888 | 1280 |

| TMUs | 184 | 40 |

| ROPs | 64 | 32 |

| RT cores | 46 | 10 |

| Tensor cores | 184 | 40 |

| Pixel rate | 158.4 GPixel/s | 56.64 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 455.4 GTexel/s | 70.80 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 29.15 TFLOPS | 4.531 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 29.15 TFLOPS (1:1) | 4.531 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 200 W | 60 W |

| Slot width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

| Power connectors | 1x 16-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 250 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a | No outputs |

| Length | 240 mm (9.4 inches) | Not listed |

| Height | 110 mm (4.3 inches) | Not listed |

| Width | 40 mm (1.6 inches) | Not listed |

| Release date | 2023-04-11 | 2021-11-09 |

| Launch MSRP | 599 USD | None |