AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT vs NVIDIA CMP 30HX Comparison

# Where Each One Wins

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT wins every single head-to-head benchmark recorded in this comparison. The NVIDIA CMP 30HX does not register a single win across the shared test suite. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6950 XT posts a score of 205,998 against the CMP 30HX’s 65,199, a delta of -68.3% from the AMD card’s perspective. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 6950 XT scores 165,212 versus 62,484, a delta of -62.2%. These are not marginal victories; they are overwhelming margins that place the two products in entirely different performance strata.

The CMP 30HX’s only meaningful benchmark presence comes from its two Geekbench scores, which place it at the 89th percentile of all GPUs. The RX 6950 XT, by contrast, sits at the 88th percentile, despite having a substantially higher raw score in the shared tests. This apparent contradiction is explained by the fact that the RX 6950 XT has a much broader benchmark portfolio—including 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, PassMark DirectX 9/10/11/12, PassMark G2D/G3D, and Geekbench Metal—which pulls its average down relative to the CMP 30HX’s narrow two-test sample. The CMP 30HX’s average benchmark score is 63,842, while the RX 6950 XT’s average is 58,392, yet the RX 6950 XT wins decisively in every directly comparable workload.

For use-case segmentation, the RX 6950 XT is the clear choice for any compute workload that leverages OpenCL or Vulkan, as well as for DirectX 12 gaming scenarios (evidenced by its 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 4,235). The CMP 30HX, lacking display outputs entirely, is a mining-oriented product with no gaming or rendering utility for end users. Its only advantage is its existence as a lower-power alternative—125 W TDP versus 335 W—but that advantage does not translate into any benchmark win.

# FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA CMP 30HX has a higher average benchmark score of 63,842, compared to the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT’s 58,392. This is due to the CMP 30HX being evaluated on only two Geekbench tests, while the RX 6950 XT’s average includes a broader and more varied set of benchmarks.

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

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT scores 205,998 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 68.3% higher than the NVIDIA CMP 30HX’s 65,199. This is the largest margin between the two cards in any shared test.

Q: Does the NVIDIA CMP 30HX win in any benchmark?

A: No. In the head-to-head benchmark data, the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT wins both recorded tests (Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan). The NVIDIA CMP 30HX has zero wins.

Q: What is the percentile ranking difference between the two GPUs?

A: The NVIDIA CMP 30HX sits at the 89th percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT sits at the 88th percentile. Despite the RX 6950 XT’s decisive wins in shared tests, the percentile difference is negligible because the CMP 30HX’s limited benchmark sample inflates its relative standing.

Q: Which card supports more modern graphics APIs?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the NVIDIA CMP 30HX supports only DirectX 12 (12_1). Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT features 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA CMP 30HX has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 336.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 6950 XT offers more than double the memory and 71.4% more bandwidth.

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data consists of exactly two tests, and the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT dominates both. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6950 XT achieves 205,998 points, while the CMP 30HX manages only 65,199 points. This represents a 68.3% deficit for the NVIDIA product—a margin so large that it suggests the CMP 30HX is not merely slower, but operating in a different performance class altogether. The RX 6950 XT’s OpenCL score is more than three times that of the CMP 30HX.

The Geekbench Vulkan test tells a similar story. The RX 6950 XT scores 165,212, while the CMP 30HX scores 62,484. The delta is 62.2% in favor of AMD. While slightly narrower than the OpenCL gap, this still represents a massive performance chasm. The CMP 30HX’s Vulkan score is only 37.8% of the RX 6950 XT’s total.

These results align with the underlying hardware specifications. The RX 6950 XT has 5,120 shading units, 320 texture mapping units, and 128 ROPs, versus the CMP 30HX’s 1,408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The compute throughput figures confirm the gap: the RX 6950 XT delivers 23.65 TFLOPS FP32, while the CMP 30HX delivers 5.027 TFLOPS FP32—a 4.7-to-1 ratio. Texture fill rate tells the same story with 739.2 GTexel/s versus 157.1 GTexel/s.

Beyond the shared tests, the RX 6950 XT has additional benchmark data that contextualizes its performance. Its PassMark G3D score is 28,070, and its PassMark GPU Compute score is 14,199. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 4,235. The CMP 30HX has no comparable data, so these figures cannot be directly compared, but they indicate that the RX 6950 XT is a well-rounded performer across gaming and compute workloads.

# Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The NVIDIA CMP 30HX uses the TU116 chip on a 12 nm process, while the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT uses the Navi 21 chip on a 7 nm process. The transistor counts diverge sharply: 6,600 million for the CMP 30HX versus 26,800 million for the RX 6950 XT. Die size also differs, with the CMP 30HX at 284 mm² and the RX 6950 XT at 520 mm². The resulting transistor densities are 23.2M per mm² for NVIDIA and 51.5M per mm² for AMD.

Clock speeds favor AMD decisively. The CMP 30HX has a base clock of 1530 MHz and a boost clock of 1785 MHz. The RX 6950 XT boosts to 2310 MHz with a base of 1860 MHz, and it also has a game clock of 2100 MHz. Memory clocks differ as well: the CMP 30HX runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), while the RX 6950 XT runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective).

Memory capacity and bandwidth are major differentiators. The CMP 30HX has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, yielding 336.0 GB/s. The RX 6950 XT has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 576.0 GB/s. The RX 6950 XT also has 80 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the CMP 30HX.

Power and physical specifications diverge significantly. The CMP 30HX has a 125 W TDP and requires a single 8-pin power connector with a 300 W suggested PSU. The RX 6950 XT has a 335 W TDP, needs two 8-pin connectors, and calls for a 700 W PSU. The CMP 30HX is dual-slot and measures 229 mm by 111 mm by 35 mm. The RX 6950 XT is triple-slot and measures 267 mm by 120 mm by 50 mm.

The bus interface differs: the CMP 30HX uses PCIe 1.0 x4, while the RX 6950 XT uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs are another fundamental difference—the CMP 30HX has none, while the RX 6950 XT offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 2x DisplayPort 1.4a. Release dates are also distinct, with the CMP 30HX launching on 2021-02-24 and the RX 6950 XT on 2022-05-09.

# Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is generational. The NVIDIA CMP 30HX is built on the Turing architecture, which predates the ray tracing-focused RTX generation that followed. Turing on 12 nm offers no dedicated ray tracing cores and no tensor cores in this configuration. The AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT uses RDNA 2.0, which is AMD’s second-generation RDNA design and includes 80 ray tracing cores. This architectural difference explains the DirectX support gap: the RX 6950 XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the CMP 30HX is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1).

The RDNA 2.0 architecture is built on a 7 nm process, enabling a transistor density of 51.5M per mm², more than double the 23.2M per mm² of Turing on 12 nm. This density advantage translates into raw compute capability: the RX 6950 XT has 5,120 shading units and 320 TMUs, while the CMP 30HX has 1,408 shading units and 88 TMUs. The ROP count also favors AMD at 128 versus 48.

The RX 6950 XT’s FP16 performance of 47.31 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) is particularly noteworthy, as it doubles its FP32 figure. The CMP 30HX’s FP16 is 10.05 TFLOPS, also at a 2:1 ratio. This indicates that AMD’s architecture handles half-precision workloads more efficiently relative to its peak single-precision output, which is relevant for certain compute tasks.

The RX 6950 XT is part of the Radeon RX 6000 series, marking it as a consumer gaming product with full display capabilities. The CMP 30HX belongs to NVIDIA’s Mining GPUs generation, which explains its lack of display outputs and its PCIe 1.0 x4 interface—a severely restricted bus that is unusual for a modern GPU. The CMP 30HX’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP (average score 63,830, delta 0%) and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 (average score 63,693, delta 0.2%), while the RX 6950 XT’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA P102-100 (average score 58,528, delta -0.2%) and the Intel Arc A570M (average score 58,239, delta 0.3%).

# The Verdict

The data supports only one conclusion: the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT is the superior GPU by every measurable performance metric. In the two shared benchmarks, it wins by 68.3% in OpenCL and 62.2% in Vulkan. Its hardware specifications are overwhelmingly superior—5,120 shading units versus 1,408, 23.65 TFLOPS versus 5.027 TFLOPS, 16 GB versus 6 GB of memory, and 576.0 GB/s versus 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. It also adds ray tracing support, modern display outputs, and PCIe 4.0 x16 connectivity.

The NVIDIA CMP 30HX has no benchmark victories and no use case where it outperforms the RX 6950 XT. Its only advantages are its lower TDP (125 W versus 335 W) and its smaller physical footprint, which may appeal to constrained deployments. However, the CMP 30HX has no display outputs, making it unsuitable for gaming or any interactive workload. It is a mining-only product, and even in that context, its 5.027 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is a fraction of the RX 6950 XT’s capability.

The percentile rankings are nearly identical (89th for the CMP 30HX, 88th for the RX 6950 XT), but this is misleading due to the CMP 30HX’s limited benchmark sample. The RX 6950 XT’s average score of 58,392 across 11 benchmarks is more representative of real-world performance than the CMP 30HX’s 63,842 across just two. For any user seeking compute performance, the RX 6950 XT is the only rational choice. For anyone needing a GPU with display outputs, the CMP 30HX is not even a contender. The verdict is clear: the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT wins decisively, and the NVIDIA CMP 30HX should be considered only for specialized, mining-specific deployments where its lower power draw and smaller size are paramount.