NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile vs NVIDIA N1 20SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a full benchmark suite for the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile, while the NVIDIA N1 20SM has no recorded benchmark scores. This makes the comparison one-sided in terms of measured data. The RTX 4070 Mobile posts an average benchmark score of 27,435 across all tests, placing it in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs tracked by the database. By contrast, the N1 20SM holds a 50th percentile ranking with an average score of zero, reflecting the absence of any submitted test results.

The RTX 4070 Mobile's strongest result comes in the Geekbench OpenCL test, where it scores 109,197. Its Geekbench Vulkan result is nearly identical at 108,367, indicating balanced performance across compute and graphics APIs. In the Passmark suite, the GPU delivers 19,587 in the G3D test, 8,399 in GPU compute, 763 in G2D, 223 in DirectX 9, 179 in DirectX 11, 116 in DirectX 10, and 85 in DirectX 12. These figures show a clear progression where older DirectX workloads score higher relative to the modern DirectX 12 path, a pattern common among mobile GPUs with driver overhead in newer APIs.

The RTX 4070 Mobile's nearest rivals in the database provide context for its average score. The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT records an average of 27,425, a delta of 0 percent relative to the RTX 4070 Mobile, meaning the two are statistically tied in aggregate performance. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 posts 27,565, which is 0.5 percent higher than the RTX 4070 Mobile. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell sits at 27,135, 1.1 percent lower, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 reaches 27,839, 1.5 percent higher. These deltas are all within a narrow band of roughly 2.6 percentage points, showing that the RTX 4070 Mobile's overall standing is tightly clustered among desktop-class and workstation GPUs despite its mobile form factor.

The N1 20SM offers no comparable benchmark data. Its percentile rank of 50 is a default midpoint value rather than a measured performance tier. Without any Passmark or Geekbench entries, the database cannot compute a meaningful score delta against the RTX 4070 Mobile. The only quantifiable performance indicators for the N1 20SM are its theoretical specifications, which do not translate directly into application-level results.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4070 Mobile wins decisively in every measured benchmark category because it is the only one of the two with recorded results. Its 15.62 TFLOPS of FP32 compute power and 15.62 TFLOPS of FP16 compute power (at a 1:1 ratio) give it a theoretical advantage in general-purpose and gaming workloads. The N1 20SM counters with 12.01 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16, a reduction of roughly 23 percent in raw shader throughput.

In rasterization throughput, the RTX 4070 Mobile delivers 81.36 GPixel/s of pixel fill rate and 244.1 GTexel/s of texture fill rate. The N1 20SM posts 56.30 GPixel/s and 375.4 GTexel/s respectively. The pixel rate favors the RTX 4070 Mobile by a clear margin, while the texture rate favors the N1 20SM substantially, indicating a different balance between pixel-dense and texture-heavy workloads.

The memory subsystem splits the two further. The RTX 4070 Mobile uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The N1 20SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The N1 20SM's bus width is double that of the RTX 4070 Mobile, and its bandwidth is about 7 percent higher, but this comes with a slower effective memory clock of 8.5 Gbps versus 16 Gbps for the RTX 4070 Mobile. The RTX 4070 Mobile's memory clock is nearly twice as fast in effective data rate terms, which matters for latency-sensitive workloads.

The RTX 4070 Mobile also wins on API support. It lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1 20SM lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A, meaning no compatible API support is recorded in the database. This effectively disqualifies the N1 20SM from gaming and most consumer graphics applications, while the RTX 4070 Mobile is fully equipped for modern titles.

In terms of ray tracing and tensor work, the RTX 4070 Mobile contains 36 RT cores and 144 tensor cores. The N1 20SM has 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores. The RTX 4070 Mobile holds a 44 percent advantage in RT core count and an 80 percent advantage in tensor core count, suggesting stronger ray-traced rendering and AI acceleration capabilities.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The RTX 4070 Mobile has an average benchmark score of 27,435. The N1 20SM has an average benchmark score of 0 because no benchmark results are recorded for it.

Q: How does the RTX 4070 Mobile compare to its closest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT?

A: The RTX 4070 Mobile scores 27,435 on average, while the RX 6700 XT scores 27,425, a delta of 0 percent. The two GPUs are effectively tied in aggregate performance.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference between the two?

A: The RTX 4070 Mobile has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the N1 20SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory. The N1 20SM also uses a 256-bit bus versus the RTX 4070 Mobile's 128-bit bus.

Q: Does the N1 20SM support DirectX?

A: The database lists DirectX as N/A for the N1 20SM, along with OpenGL and Vulkan. The RTX 4070 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute power?

A: The RTX 4070 Mobile delivers 15.62 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the N1 20SM delivers 12.01 TFLOPS. The RTX 4070 Mobile leads by roughly 30 percent in this metric.

Q: What are the texture fill rates for each GPU?

A: The RTX 4070 Mobile has a texture rate of 244.1 GTexel/s, and the N1 20SM has a texture rate of 375.4 GTexel/s. The N1 20SM leads in texture fill rate by about 54 percent.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ significantly across nearly every major specification. The RTX 4070 Mobile uses the AD106 chip, while the N1 20SM uses the GB20B chip. The process node is identical at 5 nm from TSMC, but the die size differs: the RTX 4070 Mobile measures 188 mm², and the N1 20SM measures 382 mm². Transistor count is 22,900 million for the RTX 4070 Mobile, while the N1 20SM's transistor count is listed as unknown. Transistor density is 121.8M per mm² for the RTX 4070 Mobile, with no density figure recorded for the N1 20SM.

Clock speeds diverge sharply. The RTX 4070 Mobile has a base clock of 1395 MHz and a boost clock of 1695 MHz. The N1 20SM has a base clock of 741 MHz and a boost clock of 2346 MHz. The N1 20SM's boost clock is 651 MHz higher, but its base clock is 654 MHz lower, indicating a wider clock range.

Memory configurations differ in size, type, bus width, and bandwidth. The RTX 4070 Mobile uses 8 GB of GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The N1 20SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X with a 256-bit bus and 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. Memory clock is 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) for the RTX 4070 Mobile and 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective) for the N1 20SM.

Shader resources differ as well. The RTX 4070 Mobile has 4608 shading units, 144 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 36 RT cores, and 144 tensor cores. The N1 20SM has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 24 ROPs, 20 RT cores, and 80 tensor cores. The RTX 4070 Mobile has more shading units, ROPs, RT cores, and tensor cores, while the N1 20SM has more TMUs.

Power draw is listed as 115 W for the RTX 4070 Mobile, with the N1 20SM's TDP listed as unknown. Both are integrated-class GPUs with no power connectors. The bus interface differs: the RTX 4070 Mobile uses PCIe 4.0 x8, and the N1 20SM uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs are portable-device dependent for the RTX 4070 Mobile, while the N1 20SM has 1x HDMI.

Release dates also differ. The RTX 4070 Mobile launched on January 2, 2023, and the N1 20SM has a release date of May 31, 2026. The RTX 4070 Mobile has a predecessor in the GeForce 30 Mobile series and a successor in the GeForce 50 Mobile series, while the N1 20SM has neither listed.

Architecture Differences

The RTX 4070 Mobile is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture, part of the GeForce 40 Mobile generation. The N1 20SM is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, part of the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation. Both use a 5 nm process from TSMC, but the underlying design philosophies differ.

Ada Lovelace is a dedicated graphics architecture with full support for DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. It uses 36 RT cores for ray tracing and 144 tensor cores for AI workloads. The FP32 and FP16 compute rates are identical at 15.62 TFLOPS, indicating a 1:1 ratio with no FP16 acceleration multiplier.

Blackwell 2.0 in the N1 20SM has 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores. Its FP32 and FP16 rates are also 1:1 at 12.01 TFLOPS. The architecture records no API support in the database, with DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan all listed as N/A. This suggests the N1 20SM is designed for non-traditional graphics workloads or specialized compute environments.

The transistor density tells a story of design priorities. The RTX 4070 Mobile packs 121.8M transistors per mm² into a 188 mm² die. The N1 20SM has a larger die at 382 mm² but its transistor density is unrecorded. The larger die with a 256-bit memory bus and 128 GB of LPDDR5X indicates a focus on memory capacity and bandwidth rather than raw shader throughput.

The boost clock behavior differs notably. The N1 20SM boosts to 2346 MHz, which is 38 percent higher than the RTX 4070 Mobile's 1695 MHz boost. However, the N1 20SM's base clock of 741 MHz is 47 percent lower. This wide clock range suggests the N1 20SM is designed for burst workloads that can reach high frequencies under load, while the RTX 4070 Mobile maintains a more consistent clock envelope for sustained gaming and rendering.

The RT core and tensor core counts favor the RTX 4070 Mobile on a per-SM basis as well. With 36 RT cores across its configuration, the RTX 4070 Mobile has nearly double the RT core count of the N1 20SM's 20. Tensor cores follow the same pattern at 144 versus 80. These differences point to the RTX 4070 Mobile being the stronger choice for ray-traced content and machine learning inference, while the N1 20SM's advantages in texture rate and memory capacity position it differently in the database's recorded specifications.