NVIDIA CMP 30HX vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Comparison

The NVIDIA CMP 30HX and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 represent two extreme poles of GPU design: one is a specialized mining card engineered for a single task, while the other is a flagship consumer graphics processor built for maximum compute performance. The benchmark data reflects this chasm, with the RTX 4090 dominating every common test. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 4090 scores 255,416 against the CMP 30HX’s 65,199, a delta of -74.5% for the older card. The gap widens in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RTX 4090 hits 271,631 versus 62,484, a -77% difference. These are not marginal improvements; they represent a performance class separation.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data reveals a decisive sweep for the RTX 4090, winning both recorded tests. The most striking result is in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RTX 4090’s 271,631 score is over four times the CMP 30HX’s 62,484. This -77% delta is the largest margin in the comparison, highlighting the architectural gulf between a Turing-based mining card and an Ada Lovelace flagship. For context, the CMP 30HX’s average benchmark score of 63,842 places it near rivals like the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP (63,830, 0% delta) and AMD Radeon RX 7600M (63,775, 0.1% delta), showing it is competitive within its own mining-oriented niche. However, the RTX 4090’s average score of 60,347 is dragged down by its inclusion of legacy DirectX Passmark scores (e.g., 150 in DirectX 12, 224 in DirectX 10), which are not representative of its raw compute power.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 4090 posts 255,416, a -74.5% delta over the CMP 30HX’s 65,199. This test emphasizes general-purpose compute, where the RTX 4090’s 16,384 shading units and 82.58 TFLOPS FP32 performance overwhelm the CMP 30HX’s 1,408 shading units and 5.027 TFLOPS. The CMP 30HX does hold a slight edge in percentile ranking: it sits at the 89th percentile versus the RTX 4090’s 88th, but this is a statistical artifact of the RTX 4090’s mixed benchmark suite, not a reflection of real-world capability. The RTX 4090’s closest rivals in the database include the Intel Arc Pro A60 (60,326, 0% delta) and AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (61,896, -2.5% delta), which are far below its compute ceiling.

The RTX 4090 also wins decisively in Vulkan, a modern graphics API where its architecture excels. Its 271,631 score versus 62,484 is a -77% delta, the largest in the dataset. This result underscores the RTX 4090’s advantage in geometry processing and rasterization, driven by its 512 texture mapping units and 176 render output units, compared to the CMP 30HX’s 88 TMUs and 48 ROPs. For the CMP 30HX, its only benchmark wins are against its own mining-card peers; it is not designed for graphics workloads, and the data confirms it is outclassed by the RTX 4090 in every measurable dimension.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the RTX 4090 is the superior product for any compute or graphics task. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 3.9 times higher, and its Vulkan score is 4.3 times higher than the CMP 30HX. For users seeking raw performance in rendering, machine learning, or high-end gaming, the RTX 4090 is the only rational choice from this comparison. Its 82.58 TFLOPS FP32 and 1.01 TB/s memory bandwidth are class-leading, while the CMP 30HX’s 5.027 TFLOPS and 336.0 GB/s are adequate only for its original mining purpose.

The CMP 30HX, however, is not without merit in its niche. Its average benchmark score of 63,842 places it in the 89th percentile of all GPUs, outperforming its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100, by -0.6% delta. For a card with no display outputs and a PCIe 1.0 x4 interface, its compute density (23.2M transistors/mm²) is respectable for a 12 nm process. But the RTX 4090’s 5 nm process and 125.3M transistors/mm² density render it obsolete for any modern workload. The verdict is straightforward: pick the RTX 4090 for performance, pick the CMP 30HX only if the specific task is cryptocurrency mining and the card’s 125 W TDP is a priority over compute power.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures. The CMP 30HX uses the Turing architecture (chip TU116) on a 12 nm process at TSMC, with 6,600 million transistors on a 284 mm² die. The RTX 4090 uses the Ada Lovelace architecture (chip AD102) on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC, but packs 76,300 million transistors into a 609 mm² die. This represents a transistor density jump from 23.2M/mm² to 125.3M/mm², a 5.4-fold increase. The RTX 4090’s die is 2.1 times larger but holds 11.6 times more transistors, illustrating the density advantage of the newer process node.

The RTX 4090 adds dedicated hardware absent from the CMP 30HX: 128 ray tracing cores and 512 tensor cores. The CMP 30HX has neither, reflecting its mining-focused design where ray tracing and AI acceleration are irrelevant. The RTX 4090’s FP16 performance is 82.58 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), matching its FP32 output, while the CMP 30HX’s FP16 is 10.05 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), meaning it achieves half-rate FP16. This makes the RTX 4090 vastly more efficient for mixed-precision compute. The RTX 4090 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the CMP 30HX is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1), a difference that affects advanced rendering features like mesh shaders and variable rate shading.

Specification Differences

The specifications diverge sharply across every major field. The RTX 4090 has 16,384 shading units, 512 TMUs, and 176 ROPs, versus the CMP 30HX’s 1,408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. Pixel rate is 443.5 GPixel/s for the RTX 4090 versus 85.68 GPixel/s for the CMP 30HX, a 5.2-fold difference. Texture rate is 1,290.2 GTexel/s versus 157.1 GTexel/s, a 8.2-fold gap. Memory is another major divider: the RTX 4090 offers 24 GB of GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus with 1.01 TB/s bandwidth, while the CMP 30HX has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 336.0 GB/s. The RTX 4090’s memory clock is 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective) versus the CMP 30HX’s 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective).

Clock speeds also favor the RTX 4090: base 2235 MHz and boost 2520 MHz versus 1530 MHz and 1785 MHz. Power consumption scales accordingly, with the RTX 4090 rated at 450 W TDP and a 850 W suggested PSU, while the CMP 30HX is 125 W with a 300 W PSU. The RTX 4090 is a triple-slot card with a 1x 16-pin connector, measuring 304 mm x 137 mm x 61 mm; the CMP 30HX is dual-slot with a 1x 8-pin connector, measuring 229 mm x 111 mm x 35 mm. The RTX 4090 has display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a), while the CMP 30HX has none. The bus interface also differs: PCIe 4.0 x16 for the RTX 4090 versus PCIe 1.0 x4 for the CMP 30HX, a severe bottleneck for the mining card.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA CMP 30HX has an average benchmark score of 63,842, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 has an average of 60,347. However, this is misleading due to the RTX 4090’s inclusion of legacy DirectX Passmark scores; in direct head-to-head tests, the RTX 4090 wins both Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan.

Q: What is the performance difference in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The RTX 4090 scores 271,631 versus the CMP 30HX’s 62,484, a delta of -77% for the CMP 30HX. This is the largest margin in the head-to-head dataset.

Q: How do the transistor counts compare?

A: The CMP 30HX has 6,600 million transistors on a 284 mm² die, while the RTX 4090 has 76,300 million on a 609 mm² die. The RTX 4090’s transistor density is 125.3M/mm² versus 23.2M/mm².

Q: Does the CMP 30HX support ray tracing?

A: No, the CMP 30HX has no ray tracing cores, while the RTX 4090 has 128. The CMP 30HX also lacks tensor cores, which the RTX 4090 includes (512).

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: The CMP 30HX has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 336.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4090 has 24 GB of GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus with 1.01 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient?

A: The CMP 30HX has a 125 W TDP and requires a 300 W PSU, while the RTX 4090 has a 450 W TDP and requires an 850 W PSU. The CMP 30HX is dual-slot with a 1x 8-pin connector; the RTX 4090 is triple-slot with a 1x 16-pin connector.