NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 vs NVIDIA Rubin GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 and the NVIDIA Rubin GPU occupy entirely different segments of the hardware landscape. The database records a single benchmark result for the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102, a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 6269.5. The Rubin GPU has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, and its average benchmark score is listed as zero. This absence of comparative data means a direct performance comparison cannot be established through measurements. Instead, the analysis must rely on the architectural specifications and the recorded positioning of the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 within its own performance percentile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for these two devices. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 has a single recorded benchmark result, 6269.5 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, which corresponds to an average benchmark score of 6270. Its percentile versus all GPUs is 36, indicating that it sits below the median in the overall distribution of tested graphics hardware. The nearest rivals in the database provide context for this score. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER has an identical average score of 6270 with a delta percentage of zero, meaning the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 performs on par with that card in the recorded metric. The NVIDIA Quadro K620 scores 6282, which is 0.2 percent higher, a negligible margin. The AMD FirePro W600 scores 6223, putting it 0.8 percent behind the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102. The AMD Radeon R7 M350 scores 6327, which is 0.9 percent ahead.

For the Rubin GPU, the database lists no benchmarks, no average score, and no nearest rivals. Its percentile versus all GPUs is 50, which is a placeholder value rather than a measured result. Since there are no recorded measurements for the Rubin GPU, any statement about its benchmark performance would be unsupported. The data simply shows that the Rubin GPU has not been evaluated in the same manner as the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102, with its single score, demonstrates a specific level of DX12 performance that places it close to several other cards in the database. The deltas among those rivals are all under one percent, indicating a tightly clustered set of results around the 6270 mark.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and process nodes. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 uses the AD102 chip with the Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process by TSMC. The Rubin GPU uses the GR100 chip with the Rubin architecture, also fabricated by TSMC but on a 3 nm process. The transistor counts differ dramatically. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 contains 76,300 million transistors on a die size of 609 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 125.3 million per square millimeter. The Rubin GPU contains 336,000 million transistors on a die size of 1456 mm², with a transistor density of 230.8 million per square millimeter. That is more than four times the transistor count and over twice the die area.

The memory subsystems are also completely different. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 uses 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 672.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock is listed as 1313 MHz with 21 Gbps effective speed. The Rubin GPU uses 288 GB of HBM4 memory on a 16384-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 22.1 TB/s, which is over thirty times higher. The memory clock for the Rubin GPU is 2695 MHz with 10.8 Gbps effective speed. The bus width of 16384 bits is a massive difference, reflecting the server-oriented design of the Rubin GPU.

Core counts show similar divergence. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 has 8448 shading units, 264 texture mapping units, and 96 raster output processors. It also features 66 ray tracing cores and 264 tensor cores. The Rubin GPU has 28672 shading units, 896 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output processors. It has 896 tensor cores, but its ray tracing core count is listed as null in the database. The pixel rates differ as well: the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 delivers 250.6 GPixel/s, while the Rubin GPU delivers 54.41 GPixel/s, a lower figure despite the larger core count. The texture rates show the opposite, with the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 at 689.0 GTexel/s and the Rubin GPU at 2031.2 GTexel/s.

Floating-point performance numbers reveal the intended workloads. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 achieves 44.10 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16, with a 1:1 ratio. The Rubin GPU achieves 130.0 TFLOPS for FP32 and 260.0 TFLOPS for FP16, with a 2:1 ratio. That FP16 figure is nearly six times higher than the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102. Clock speeds also contrast sharply. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 has a base clock of 2340 MHz and a boost clock of 2610 MHz. The Rubin GPU has a base clock of 700 MHz and a boost clock of 2267 MHz. The lower base clock on the Rubin GPU suggests a design optimized for sustained throughput rather than peak single-thread speed.

The power and physical specifications reinforce the different design goals. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 has a TDP of 285 W and uses a triple-slot cooler with a single 16-pin power connector, requiring a 600 W suggested power supply. The Rubin GPU has a TDP of 2300 W and mounts as an SXM module with a suggested power supply of 2700 W. The Rubin GPU lists no power connectors and no display outputs, consistent with a server accelerator. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 has display outputs including one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 1.4a connections. The bus interfaces differ as well, with PCIe 4.0 x16 for the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 and PCIe 6.0 x16 for the Rubin GPU.

The API support also diverges. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Rubin GPU lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, indicating that it is not designed for conventional graphics APIs. The production statuses differ: the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 is end-of-life, while the Rubin GPU is active. The release dates are also far apart, with the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 released in June 2024 and the Rubin GPU slated for December 2025. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 has a predecessor in GeForce 30 and a successor in GeForce 50, while the Rubin GPU has a predecessor in Server Blackwell and no successor listed.

The Verdict

The recorded data indicates that the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 is a consumer graphics card with a measured benchmark score, while the Rubin GPU is a server accelerator without any benchmark entries. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 sits at the 36th percentile among all GPUs in the database, with an average score of 6270 that matches the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER exactly. Its nearest rivals are all within one percent of its score, showing that its DX12 performance is competitive with those specific cards. The Rubin GPU has no comparable measurement, so no statement about its relative performance can be made from the database.

The architectural data shows that the Rubin GPU is designed for a different purpose. Its massive memory capacity of 288 GB, enormous bandwidth of 22.1 TB/s, and FP16 throughput of 260.0 TFLOPS point toward compute-heavy workloads rather than rasterization. Its lack of display outputs and graphics API support confirms that direction. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102, with its 16 GB memory, 672.3 GB/s bandwidth, and full DirectX 12 Ultimate support, is built for gaming and consumer graphics. The choice between them depends on the workload: the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 serves conventional graphics tasks with a verified score, while the Rubin GPU serves server-side compute without any recorded graphics benchmarks.

FAQ

Q: What is the recorded benchmark score for the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102?

A: The database records a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 6269.5, which rounds to an average benchmark score of 6270.

Q: Does the NVIDIA Rubin GPU have any benchmark scores in the database?

A: No. The Rubin GPU has an empty benchmarks list, an average benchmark score of zero, and no nearest rivals.

Q: How does the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 compare to the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER in the database?

A: The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER has an identical average score of 6270 with a delta percentage of zero, indicating equal performance in the recorded metric.

Q: What memory types do the two GPUs use?

A: The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 uses 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, while the Rubin GPU uses 288 GB of HBM4 on a 16384-bit bus.

Q: What is the FP32 performance of each GPU?

A: The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 delivers 44.10 TFLOPS for FP32, while the Rubin GPU delivers 130.0 TFLOPS for FP32.

Q: Does the Rubin GPU support DirectX?

A: The database lists DirectX as N/A for the Rubin GPU, while the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2).

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 wins in areas tied to consumer graphics. It has a measured 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 6269.5, placing it at the 36th percentile among all GPUs. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it usable for standard graphics applications. Its pixel rate of 250.6 GPixel/s exceeds the Rubin GPU's 54.41 GPixel/s, indicating stronger rasterization throughput. Its base clock of 2340 MHz and boost clock of 2610 MHz are higher than the Rubin GPU's 700 MHz base and 2267 MHz boost, suggesting better single-thread responsiveness. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 also has a lower TDP of 285 W compared to 2300 W, and it fits in a triple-slot form factor with display outputs.

The Rubin GPU wins in compute and memory bandwidth. It has 28672 shading units versus 8448, and 896 tensor cores versus 264. Its FP32 output of 130.0 TFLOPS is nearly three times the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102's 44.10 TFLOPS, and its FP16 output of 260.0 TFLOPS is nearly six times higher. The memory bandwidth of 22.1 TB/s dwarfs the 672.3 GB/s of the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102, and the 288 GB capacity allows for far larger datasets. The 16384-bit bus width and HBM4 memory type are server-class features. The texture rate of 2031.2 GTexel/s also exceeds the 689.0 GTexel/s of the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102. The Rubin GPU's 230.8 million transistors per square millimeter density reflects a newer 3 nm process, and its PCIe 6.0 x16 interface is a generation ahead of the PCIe 4.0 x16 on the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102.

Specification Differences

The process node differs: 5 nm for the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 versus 3 nm for the Rubin GPU. Transistor counts are 76,300 million versus 336,000 million. Die sizes are 609 mm² versus 1456 mm². Transistor densities are 125.3 million per square millimeter versus 230.8 million per square millimeter. Base clocks are 2340 MHz versus 700 MHz. Boost clocks are 2610 MHz versus 2267 MHz. Memory clocks are 1313 MHz with 21 Gbps effective versus 2695 MHz with 10.8 Gbps effective. Memory sizes are 16 GB versus 288 GB. Memory types are GDDR6X versus HBM4. Bus widths are 256 bit versus 16384 bit. Bandwidths are 672.3 GB/s versus 22.1 TB/s. Shading units are 8448 versus 28672. Texture mapping units are 264 versus 896. Raster output processors are 96 versus 24. Ray tracing cores are 66 versus null. Tensor cores are 264 versus 896. Pixel rates are 250.6 GPixel/s versus 54.41 GPixel/s. Texture rates are 689.0 GTexel/s versus 2031.2 GTexel/s. FP32 is 44.10 TFLOPS versus 130.0 TFLOPS. FP16 is 44.10 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio versus 260.0 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. TDP is 285 W versus 2300 W. Slot widths are triple-slot versus SXM module. Power connectors are one 16-pin versus none. Suggested power supplies are 600 W versus 2700 W. Bus interfaces are PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 6.0 x16. Display outputs are one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 1.4a versus no outputs. DirectX support is 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus N/A. OpenGL support is 4.6 versus N/A. Vulkan support is 1.4 versus N/A. Production status is end-of-life versus active. Release dates are June 2024 versus December 2025. The launch MSRP for the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 is 799 USD, while the Rubin GPU has no launch MSRP listed. The Rubin GPU also has no dimensions recorded, whereas the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 measures 310 mm in length, 140 mm in height, and 61 mm in width.