NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103 both belong to the GeForce 40-series lineup, yet they represent opposite ends of the performance and capability spectrum. The RTX 4010 uses the older Ampere architecture on Samsung’s 8 nm process, while the RTX 4070 AD103 uses Ada Lovelace on TSMC’s 5 nm node. The recorded data shows that the RTX 4010 has a single benchmark score of 2893 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, placing it at the 18th percentile among all GPUs. The RTX 4070 AD103 has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, which limits direct numerical comparisons, but its specification sheet and architectural position still provide a clear picture of its intended role. This analysis walks through the head-to-head data, verdict, architecture, specifications, frequently asked questions, and use-case splits strictly from the provided facts.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one benchmark result for the RTX 4010: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2893. This places the card at the 18th percentile among all GPUs, meaning it outperforms roughly 18 percent of the tested graphics cards in that specific workload. The nearest rivals for the RTX 4010 are all within a narrow band. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB scores 2907, which is 0.5 percent higher. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF scores 2910, 0.6 percent higher. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB scores 2913, 0.7 percent higher. The NVIDIA Quadro P600 scores 2923, 1 percent higher. These deltas are small, indicating that the RTX 4010 sits in a tightly contested performance cluster where the difference between the weakest and strongest card in this group is only about 1 percent.

For the RTX 4070 AD103, the database lists no benchmark entries and no nearest rivals. Its average benchmark score is recorded as zero, and its percentile versus all GPUs is 50. The absence of a measured score means that any direct comparison in synthetic workloads cannot be quantified from the recorded data. What the data does show is that the RTX 4070 AD103 carries specifications that suggest a much higher performance ceiling, but without a benchmark number, the head-to-head section must rely on the single data point for the RTX 4010 and the specification differences that follow.

The RTX 4010’s score of 2893 is remarkably close to the RTX 4060 Ti variants, which are higher-tier cards in the same generation. Being only 0.5 to 0.7 percent behind those cards in this single test indicates that the RTX 4010, despite its low-end positioning, delivers competitive results in this particular DX12 workload. The RTX 4070 AD103, by contrast, has no such data point, so the database cannot confirm whether it would outperform the RTX 4010 by a large margin or by a modest one. The recorded information only permits a statement that the RTX 4070 AD103 is unmeasured, while the RTX 4010 has a concrete score that places it near several mid-range cards.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the RTX 4010 is the only card with a verified benchmark result. Its 2893 score in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 puts it at the 18th percentile, and its nearest rivals are all within 1 percent of that score. This suggests that for anyone relying on measured performance, the RTX 4010 is a functional entry point that performs comparably to cards like the RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB and 16 GB, at least in this single test. The RTX 4070 AD103 has no benchmark data, so no measured performance verdict can be issued for it.

However, the specification data indicates that the RTX 4070 AD103 is designed for a much higher workload tier. It uses the Ada Lovelace architecture, a 5 nm process from TSMC, and contains 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die. The RTX 4010 uses Ampere on an 8 nm Samsung process with 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. The RTX 4070 AD103 has 5888 shading units, 184 texture mapping units, 64 render output units, 46 ray tracing cores, and 184 tensor cores. The RTX 4010 has 768 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, 16 render output units, 6 ray tracing cores, and 24 tensor cores. These numbers are not benchmark scores, but they indicate a substantial difference in raw compute resources.

The verdict from the data is straightforward: the RTX 4010 is a measured, low-power card that sits near the bottom of the performance distribution, while the RTX 4070 AD103 is an unmeasured, high-resource card that sits at the 50th percentile in the database’s ranking, but with no score to confirm its actual speed. For a user who prioritizes verified benchmark results, the RTX 4010 has a record. For a user who prioritizes architectural capability and memory capacity, the RTX 4070 AD103 offers 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus with 504.2 GB/s bandwidth, compared to the RTX 4010’s 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Architecture Differences

The RTX 4010 is built on the Ampere architecture using the GA107 chip, fabricated on Samsung’s 8 nm process. The RTX 4070 AD103 uses the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD103 chip, fabricated on TSMC’s 5 nm process. The transistor counts differ sharply: the RTX 4010 has 8,700 million transistors spread across a 200 mm² die, yielding a density of 43.5 million transistors per square millimeter. The RTX 4070 AD103 has 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die, yielding a density of 121.1 million transistors per square millimeter. The newer process node and higher density allow the RTX 4070 AD103 to pack more than five times the transistor count into less than twice the die area.

The memory subsystems also diverge. The RTX 4010 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory with a 64-bit bus and 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 4070 AD103 uses 12 GB of GDDR6X memory with a 192-bit bus and 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock for the RTX 4010 is listed as 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective, while the RTX 4070 AD103 runs at 1313 MHz with 21 Gbps effective. The effective data rate is higher on the RTX 4070 AD103, and the wider bus multiplies that advantage.

The compute resources are vastly different. The RTX 4010 has 768 shading units, 24 TMUs, 16 ROPs, 6 RT cores, and 24 tensor cores. The RTX 4070 AD103 has 5888 shading units, 184 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 46 RT cores, and 184 tensor cores. The pixel rate for the RTX 4010 is 28.19 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 42.29 GTexel/s. The RTX 4070 AD103 reaches 158.4 GPixel/s and 455.4 GTexel/s. The FP32 throughput for the RTX 4010 is 2.706 TFLOPS, while the RTX 4070 AD103 reaches 29.15 TFLOPS. Both cards have FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, meaning the RTX 4010 delivers 2.706 TFLOPS for FP16 and the RTX 4070 AD103 delivers 29.15 TFLOPS.

The clock speeds also differ. The RTX 4010 has a base clock of 1417 MHz and a boost clock of 1762 MHz. The RTX 4070 AD103 has a base clock of 1920 MHz and a boost clock of 2475 MHz. The RTX 4070 AD103 runs at higher frequencies while also having far more execution units, which compounds its performance advantage in any compute-heavy task.

Specification Differences

The RTX 4010 and the RTX 4070 AD103 differ across nearly every specification field. The RTX 4010 has a TDP of 50 W, while the RTX 4070 AD103 has a TDP of 200 W. The RTX 4010 is a single-slot card with no power connectors, while the RTX 4070 AD103 is a dual-slot card with one 16-pin connector. The suggested PSU for the RTX 4010 is 250 W, while the RTX 4070 AD103 requires a 550 W PSU. The RTX 4010 uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the RTX 4070 AD103 uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The RTX 4010 has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the RTX 4070 AD103 has one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Physical dimensions differ as well. The RTX 4010 measures 163 mm in length and 69 mm in height, with no width listed. The RTX 4070 AD103 measures 240 mm in length, 110 mm in height, and 40 mm in width. The RTX 4010 has a production status of Active, while the RTX 4070 AD103 is End-of-life. The release dates are also different: the RTX 4010 was released on April 15, 2024, while the RTX 4070 AD103 was released on February 29, 2024. The RTX 4070 AD103 has a launch MSRP of 599 USD, which is stated here once as a recorded fact. The RTX 4010 has no launch MSRP listed.

Both cards share the same DirectX version, 12 Ultimate (12_2), the same OpenGL version, 4.6, and the same Vulkan version, 1.4. Both belong to the GeForce 40-series, are manufactured by NVIDIA, and have the same generation label. The predecessor for both is GeForce 30 and the successor for both is GeForce 50. The memory type, bus width, bandwidth, shading units, TMUs, ROPs, RT cores, tensor cores, pixel rate, texture rate, FP32, FP16, TDP, slot width, power connectors, suggested PSU, bus interface, display outputs, dimensions, and production status all differ.

FAQ

Q: What is the recorded benchmark score for the RTX 4010?

A: The RTX 4010 has a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2893, placing it at the 18th percentile among all GPUs.

Q: Does the RTX 4070 AD103 have any benchmark scores in the database?

A: No, the RTX 4070 AD103 has no benchmark entries, an average score of zero, and no nearest rivals listed.

Q: How does the RTX 4010 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RTX 4010 is 0.5 percent behind the RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB, 0.6 percent behind the RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF, 0.7 percent behind the RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB, and 1 percent behind the Quadro P600.

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

A: The RTX 4010 has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4070 AD103 has 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus with 504.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two cards?

A: The RTX 4010 has a TDP of 50 W, while the RTX 4070 AD103 has a TDP of 200 W. The suggested PSU is 250 W for the RTX 4010 and 550 W for the RTX 4070 AD103.

Q: Which card uses the Ada Lovelace architecture?

A: The RTX 4070 AD103 uses the Ada Lovelace architecture on TSMC’s 5 nm process. The RTX 4010 uses the Ampere architecture on Samsung’s 8 nm process.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4010 wins in power efficiency and physical footprint. Its 50 W TDP is a quarter of the RTX 4070 AD103’s 200 W TDP, and it requires no auxiliary power connectors, only a 250 W PSU. Its single-slot design with a 163 mm length and 69 mm height makes it suitable for compact systems. It also has a measured benchmark score, which the RTX 4070 AD103 lacks, so in any database-driven comparison of verified results, the RTX 4010 is the only card with a confirmed data point. Its 2893 score places it within 1 percent of several higher-tier cards, so in the specific 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, it performs competitively with those models.

The RTX 4070 AD103 wins in raw computational resources and memory capacity. It has 5888 shading units versus 768, 184 TMUs versus 24, 64 ROPs versus 16, 46 RT cores versus 6, and 184 tensor cores versus 24. Its FP32 throughput of 29.15 TFLOPS is more than ten times the RTX 4010’s 2.706 TFLOPS. Its memory bandwidth of 504.2 GB/s is more than five times higher than the RTX 4010’s 96.00 GB/s, and its 12 GB memory capacity is three times larger. The RTX 4070 AD103 also has a wider PCIe interface, x16 versus x8, and a higher boost clock of 2475 MHz versus 1762 MHz. It has a launch MSRP of 599 USD, which is a recorded fact, but no benchmark score to validate its actual performance.

For use cases, the RTX 4010 is suited for low-power, space-constrained systems where the absence of external power connectors and a dual-slot cooler is an advantage, and where the measured 3DMark score of 2893 is sufficient evidence of its capability. The RTX 4070 AD103 is suited for workloads that demand large memory pools, high bandwidth, and extensive compute resources, such as rendering or compute tasks that can use 12 GB of GDDR6X memory and 184 tensor cores. The data does not provide a benchmark for the RTX 4070 AD103, so any performance expectation must be inferred from its specification sheet rather than from measured results. The RTX 4010 has the only verified score, and that score indicates a card near the bottom of the performance distribution, but with close proximity to several mid-range competitors in a single test.