GPU Comparison

The RTX 4070 and MX570 A occupy opposite ends of NVIDIA’s laptop and desktop graphics spectrum, yet both share the 81st percentile ranking among all GPUs. The desktop RTX 4070 is a 200 W, dual-slot Ada Lovelace card aimed at high-refresh 1440p gaming, while the MX570 A is a 25 W IGP-class Ampere part for thin-and-light portables. The average benchmark scores are nearly identical, 37,283 for the RTX 4070 versus 38,008 for the MX570 A, but that parity is misleading. The RTX 4070’s average is pulled down by a wide spread of DirectX 9/10/11 tests, while the MX570 A’s average comes from only two Geekbench runs. The head-to-head data shows a massive gulf in raw compute, but the MX570 A’s efficiency profile makes it a different class of product entirely.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The MX570 A scores 38,008 on average, which is 1.9% higher than the RTX 4070’s 37,283. However, the MX570 A’s average is based on only two Geekbench results, while the RTX 4070’s average spans ten tests including older DirectX workloads.

Q: How much faster is the RTX 4070 in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RTX 4070 scores 168,006 versus 39,780 for the MX570 A, a 322.3% advantage. That is over four times the raw compute throughput in that workload.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two in head-to-head testing?

A: The biggest delta is in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RTX 4070 leads by 334.2%, scoring 157,352 versus 36,236 for the MX570 A. The OpenCL gap is nearly as large at 322.3%.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same modern APIs?

A: Yes, both list DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. API feature parity does not translate to performance parity, as the head-to-head results show.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two chips?

A: The RTX 4070’s AD104 chip packs 121.8 million transistors per mm² on TSMC’s 5 nm process, while the MX570 A’s GA107SB has 43.5 million per mm² on Samsung’s 8 nm node. The RTX 4070 has 35,800 million transistors total versus 8,700 million for the MX570 A.

Q: Which GPU has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The RTX 4070 delivers 504.2 GB/s over a 192-bit bus with 12 GB of GDDR6X, compared to 96.00 GB/s over a 64-bit bus with 2 GB of GDDR6 for the MX570 A. That is a 5.25x bandwidth advantage for the desktop card.

Architecture Differences

The RTX 4070 uses the AD104 chip built on TSMC’s 5 nm process, while the MX570 A uses GA107SB on Samsung’s 8 nm node. The process gap is stark: 121.8 million transistors per mm² versus 43.5 million per mm². Total transistor count is 35,800 million for the RTX 4070 versus 8,700 million for the MX570 A, and the die size is 294 mm² versus 200 mm². The RTX 4070 belongs to the Ada Lovelace architecture and the GeForce 40 generation, while the MX570 A is Ampere-based from the GeForce MX (5xx) family.

Shader resources differ by roughly the same factor as transistors. The RTX 4070 has 5,888 shading units, 184 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The MX570 A has 2,048 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Ray tracing and tensor hardware follow the same pattern: 46 RT cores and 184 tensor cores on the RTX 4070, versus 16 RT cores and 64 tensor cores on the MX570 A. Pixel and texture rates reflect those counts, the RTX 4070 hits 158.4 GPixel/s and 455.4 GTexel/s, while the MX570 A manages 36.96 GPixel/s and 73.92 GTexel/s.

Memory architecture is a fundamental split. The RTX 4070 uses 12 GB of GDDR6X on a 192-bit bus with 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The MX570 A has 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s. Effective memory clocks also differ: 21 Gbps for the RTX 4070 versus 12 Gbps for the MX570 A. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so the API feature set is identical even though the underlying hardware is generations apart.

Power delivery and physical design could not be more different. The RTX 4070 is a 200 W dual-slot card requiring a 550 W power supply and a single 16-pin connector. The MX570 A is a 25 W IGP with no power connectors and no suggested PSU rating. The RTX 4070 measures 240 mm long, 110 mm tall, and 40 mm wide, while the MX570 A has no listed dimensions because it is integrated into portable devices. The RTX 4070 exposes 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a; the MX570 A’s display outputs are described as "Portable Device Dependent."

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only two benchmark tests are shared between these GPUs, and the RTX 4070 wins both decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 4070 scores 168,006 against 39,780 for the MX570 A, a 322.3% lead. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 4070 scores 157,352 versus 36,236, a 334.2% advantage. The wins tally is 2-0 in favor of the RTX 4070.

These deltas are consistent with the hardware specifications. The RTX 4070 has 5,888 shading units versus 2,048, and its FP32 throughput is 29.15 TFLOPS versus 4.731 TFLOPS. The memory bandwidth gap of 504.2 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s compounds the compute difference in memory-sensitive Vulkan workloads. The RTX 4070’s texture rate is 455.4 GTexel/s, over six times the MX570 A’s 73.92 GTexel/s.

The MX570 A’s average score of 38,008 is higher than the RTX 4070’s 37,283, but that is an artifact of test selection. The RTX 4070’s benchmark suite includes PassMark DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 tests, where it scores between 103 and 320. Those older API tests drag down its average. The MX570 A only has Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan results, which are compute-heavy and favor its architecture less poorly. The nearest-rival data reinforces this: the RTX 4070 sits 0.6% behind the RX Vega 56’s 37,507 average, while the MX570 A sits 0.3% behind the RTX 4080 Mobile’s 38,135 average.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. Process node is 5 nm (TSMC) for the RTX 4070 versus 8 nm (Samsung) for the MX570 A. Transistor count is 35,800 million versus 8,700 million. Die size is 294 mm² versus 200 mm². Transistor density is 121.8M / mm² versus 43.5M / mm².

Clock speeds favor the RTX 4070 by a wide margin. Base clock is 1920 MHz versus 832 MHz, and boost clock is 2475 MHz versus 1155 MHz. Memory clocks are 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective) versus 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective). Memory configuration is 12 GB GDDR6X on a 192-bit bus versus 2 GB GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus. Bandwidth is 504.2 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s.

Compute resources show the same pattern. Shading units are 5,888 versus 2,048. TMUs are 184 versus 64. ROPs are 64 versus 32. RT cores are 46 versus 16. Tensor cores are 184 versus 64. Pixel rate is 158.4 GPixel/s versus 36.96 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 455.4 GTexel/s versus 73.92 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 performance are both 29.15 TFLOPS for the RTX 4070 versus 4.731 TFLOPS for the MX570 A.

Power and physical specs diverge completely. TDP is 200 W versus 25 W. Slot width is dual-slot versus IGP. Power connectors are 1x 16-pin versus none. Suggested PSU is 550 W versus null. Bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.1 plus 3x DisplayPort 1.4a versus "Portable Device Dependent." The RTX 4070 has dimensions of 240 x 110 x 40 mm; the MX570 A has none listed. Release dates are 2023-04-11 for the RTX 4070 and 2021-12-16 for the MX570 A. The RTX 4070 has a launch MSRP of 599 USD; the MX570 A has none.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4070 wins every head-to-head benchmark, and its wins are not close. In Geekbench OpenCL, it is 322.3% ahead. In Geekbench Vulkan, it is 334.2% ahead. The RTX 4070 also wins on every specification that matters for gaming and rendering: more shading units, more TMUs, more ROPs, more RT and tensor cores, higher clocks, wider memory bus, and nearly 5.3x the bandwidth. It is the clear choice for any workload that stresses raw compute, ray tracing, or high-resolution textures.

The MX570 A wins where the RTX 4070 cannot compete: power efficiency and physical integration. At 25 W, it draws one-eighth the power of the RTX 4070’s 200 W. It has no power connectors, no slot width, no listed dimensions, and no PSU requirement. It is designed to be soldered into portable devices where the RTX 4070’s 240 mm length and 40 mm width would never fit. The MX570 A also edges the RTX 4070 in average benchmark score (38,008 versus 37,283), but that result comes from only two Geekbench tests and does not reflect real-world gaming or compute performance.

For modern gaming, the RTX 4070 is the only viable option. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate support is matched by the MX570 A, but the RTX 4070’s 46 RT cores versus 16 make the difference in ray-traced titles. Its 12 GB of GDDR6X versus 2 GB of GDDR6 means it can hold large textures without spilling to system memory. The MX570 A’s 96.00 GB/s bandwidth is a bottleneck even for modest 1080p workloads.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split. The RTX 4070 is a high-performance desktop GPU that wins 2 out of 2 head-to-head benchmarks by margins of 322.3% and 334.2%. It offers 29.15 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth, and a full suite of display outputs. It is end-of-life but was released in 2023 with a launch MSRP of 599 USD. Anyone building a desktop PC for gaming, 3D rendering, or GPU compute should choose the RTX 4070 without hesitation.

The MX570 A is not a competitor in that space. It is an end-of-life IGP from 2021, designed for laptops where power draw must stay under 25 W. Its 4.731 TFLOPS and 96.00 GB/s are adequate for light tasks, but its 2 GB memory capacity is limiting for anything beyond basic acceleration. Its average score of 38,008 is technically higher than the RTX 4070’s 37,283, but that is because its benchmark pool is limited to two Geekbench runs, while the RTX 4070’s average includes legacy DirectX tests where it scores as low as 103.

Choose the RTX 4070 if you need performance. Choose the MX570 A if you need an integrated GPU with no power connectors and no PSU requirement, but understand that the performance gap is over 300% in every shared test. The 81st percentile ranking for both is a statistical coincidence, not a sign of comparable capability. The RTX 4070 belongs in a desktop tower; the MX570 A belongs in a thin laptop. They are not substitutes for each other.