NVIDIA CMP 50HX vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance advantage for the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER across the two shared benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 4070 SUPER scores 172,795 against the CMP 50HX’s 56,135, a delta of 67.5% in favor of the newer card. The gap widens considerably in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RTX 4070 SUPER reaches 205,624 while the CMP 50HX manages 47,445, putting the older mining card 76.9% behind. These are not marginal differences; they represent a fundamental generational leap in raw compute throughput.

Looking at the broader database context, the CMP 50HX holds an average benchmark score of 51,790 across all recorded tests, placing it in the 86th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT at 50,951 (1.6% ahead), the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 at 50,001 (3.6% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti at 49,957 (3.7% ahead), and the Intel Arc A550M at 49,737 (4.1% ahead). The CMP 50HX therefore sits at the top of a tightly clustered group, but this cluster is far below the RTX 4070 SUPER’s standing.

The RTX 4070 SUPER, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 43,223, which places it in the 83rd percentile. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB at 43,262 (0.1% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile at 43,268 (0.1% behind), the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 at 43,301 (0.2% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile at 43,667 (1.0% behind). The RTX 4070 SUPER is effectively tied with professional workstation cards from an older generation, while the CMP 50HX outperforms consumer and professional cards that are themselves several years old.

The head-to-head results are unambiguous: the RTX 4070 SUPER wins both shared tests, with the Vulkan gap being particularly severe. The CMP 50HX, despite its higher percentile ranking, simply cannot match the Ada Lovelace architecture in these workloads. The 67.5% and 76.9% deltas are among the largest recorded between two NVIDIA cards in this database segment, underscoring that architecture age matters more than raw transistor count or die size.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and process nodes. The CMP 50HX uses the TU102 chip, based on the Turing architecture, fabricated on TSMC’s 12 nm process. It integrates 18,600 million transistors on a die size of 754 mm², yielding a transistor density of 24.7 million per square millimeter. The RTX 4070 SUPER uses the AD104 chip, based on Ada Lovelace, also from TSMC but on a 5 nm node. It packs 35,800 million transistors into a much smaller 294 mm² die, achieving 121.8 million transistors per square millimeter. The density difference is dramatic: the newer process allows more than four times the transistors per area unit, which explains the performance disparity despite the CMP 50HX having a physically larger die.

The memory subsystems differ as well. The CMP 50HX offers 10 GB of GDDR6 on a 320-bit bus, delivering 560.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 4070 SUPER features 12 GB of GDDR6X on a narrower 192-bit bus, but still reaches 504.2 GB/s. The older card has a slight bandwidth advantage in raw numbers, but the newer memory type and higher effective clock speed on the RTX 4070 SUPER compensate in practice. The CMP 50HX’s memory runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), while the RTX 4070 SUPER’s memory runs at 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective), which narrows the bandwidth gap despite the narrower bus.

The compute resources tell a more complex story. The CMP 50HX has 3,584 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, 80 raster output pipelines, 56 ray tracing cores, and 448 tensor cores. The RTX 4070 SUPER doubles the shading units to 7,168, increases TMUs to 224, keeps ROPs at 80, matches the 56 RT cores, but reduces tensor cores to 224. The FP32 throughput reflects this: the CMP 50HX delivers 11.07 TFLOPS, while the RTX 4070 SUPER delivers 35.48 TFLOPS, more than three times the raw compute. The FP16 figures are also telling: the CMP 50HX reaches 22.15 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the RTX 4070 SUPER achieves 35.48 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, meaning it does not lose half its throughput when switching to half precision.

The pixel and texture rates follow the same pattern. The CMP 50HX produces 123.6 GPixel/s and 296.6 GTexel/s, while the RTX 4070 SUPER reaches 198.0 GPixel/s and 554.4 GTexel/s. The newer card is faster in both fill-rate metrics, with the texture rate advantage being particularly pronounced. The clock speeds also differ: the CMP 50HX has a base of 1350 MHz and a boost of 1545 MHz, while the RTX 4070 SUPER runs at 1980 MHz base and 2475 MHz boost. The higher clocks, combined with the architectural improvements, drive the large benchmark deltas.

Power and connectivity differ significantly. The CMP 50HX has a 250 W TDP and requires 2x 8-pin power connectors with a 600 W suggested PSU. The RTX 4070 SUPER has a lower 220 W TDP, uses a single 16-pin connector, and suggests a 550 W PSU. The bus interface also differs: the CMP 50HX uses PCIe 1.0 x4, a legacy interface that severely limits data transfer, while the RTX 4070 SUPER uses PCIe 4.0 x16, providing substantially more bandwidth for host communication. The CMP 50HX has no display outputs, as it was designed for mining operations, while the RTX 4070 SUPER includes 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is identical. The physical dimensions are close: both are 267 mm long, but the CMP 50HX is 116 mm high and 35 mm wide, while the RTX 4070 SUPER is 112 mm high and 42 mm wide. Both are dual-slot designs.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: The NVIDIA CMP 50HX has an average benchmark score of 51,790, which is higher than the RTX 4070 SUPER’s 43,223. However, this average is based on only two recorded tests for the CMP 50HX, while the RTX 4070 SUPER has ten recorded tests, making direct comparison of the averages less meaningful than the head-to-head results.

Q: Why does the CMP 50HX have a higher percentile ranking than the RTX 4070 SUPER?

A: The CMP 50HX sits in the 86th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the RTX 4070 SUPER is in the 83rd percentile. This is because the CMP 50HX’s limited test set (only Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan) skews its average upward, while the RTX 4070 SUPER’s broader test suite includes lower-scoring legacy DirectX tests that pull its average down.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the shared benchmarks?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 4070 SUPER leads by 67.5%, scoring 172,795 versus 56,135. In Geekbench Vulkan, the lead grows to 76.9%, with scores of 205,624 versus 47,445. Both deltas favor the RTX 4070 SUPER.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The CMP 50HX has a higher raw bandwidth figure of 560.0 GB/s, compared to the RTX 4070 SUPER’s 504.2 GB/s. The older card achieves this with a wider 320-bit bus and GDDR6 memory, while the newer card uses a 192-bit bus with faster GDDR6X memory.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The CMP 50HX has a 250 W TDP, requires 2x 8-pin power connectors, and a 600 W suggested PSU. The RTX 4070 SUPER has a 220 W TDP, uses a single 16-pin connector, and a 550 W suggested PSU.

Q: Can both cards be used for display output?

A: No. The CMP 50HX has no display outputs, as it was designed for mining. The RTX 4070 SUPER has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear choice for most users: the RTX 4070 SUPER is the superior GPU in every meaningful compute workload recorded. Its 67.5% lead in OpenCL and 76.9% lead in Vulkan are decisive, and its additional display outputs make it usable in a standard desktop environment. The CMP 50HX, with no display outputs and a legacy PCIe 1.0 x4 interface, is functionally limited to mining or compute-only server roles.

However, the CMP 50HX is not without merit in the database context. Its average benchmark score of 51,790 places it in the 86th percentile, ahead of rivals like the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT, AMD Radeon RX Vega 64, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti, and Intel Arc A550M. Its 560.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is higher than the RTX 4070 SUPER’s 504.2 GB/s, and its 448 tensor cores outnumber the newer card’s 224. For workloads that specifically leverage tensor operations, the older card may still hold an edge, though the recorded benchmarks do not test this directly.

The RTX 4070 SUPER’s 35.48 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, versus 11.07 TFLOPS for the CMP 50HX, is the single most telling figure in the comparison. Combined with a 5 nm process node, 35,800 million transistors, and a 2475 MHz boost clock, the newer card represents a complete architectural overhaul rather than a simple refresh. The CMP 50HX’s 18,600 million transistors and 754 mm² die on 12 nm simply cannot compete with the efficiency and throughput of Ada Lovelace.

For a gamer or workstation user, the RTX 4070 SUPER is the only rational choice. For a mining operation that requires no display output and can tolerate a legacy bus interface, the CMP 50HX’s lower average score in its limited test set is still competitive with its nearest rivals, but the absence of modern features and the massive compute gap make it hard to recommend for any general-purpose use.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA CMP 50HX | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER |

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

| Architecture | Turing | Ada Lovelace |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 18,600 million | 35,800 million |

| Die Size | 754 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.7M / mm² | 121.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1350 MHz | 1980 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1545 MHz | 2475 MHz |

| Memory Size | 10 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6X |

| Memory Bus Width | 320 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) | 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 560.0 GB/s | 504.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 3584 | 7168 |

| TMUs | 192 | 224 |

| ROPs | 80 | 80 |

| RT Cores | 56 | 56 |

| Tensor Cores | 448 | 224 |

| Pixel Rate | 123.6 GPixel/s | 198.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 296.6 GTexel/s | 554.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 11.07 TFLOPS | 35.48 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 22.15 TFLOPS (2:1) | 35.48 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 250 W | 220 W |

| Power Connectors | 2x 8-pin | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | 550 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 1.0 x4 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

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

| Release Date | 2021-06-23 | 2024-01-16 |

| Launch MSRP | None recorded | 599 USD |

| Height | 116 mm | 112 mm |

| Width | 35 mm | 42 mm |

| Average Benchmark Score | 51,790 | 43,223 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 86th | 83rd |