NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data presents an unusual comparison: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 has a full set of benchmark results, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103 has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. This means the standard win/loss split cannot be established from direct head-to-head measurements. The RTX 4070 AD103 appears with an average benchmark score of 0 and a percentile rank of 50, while the original RTX 4070 holds a percentile rank of 81 and an average benchmark score of 37,648.

The RTX 4070 wins every measurable category by default, but that is a function of missing data rather than demonstrated superiority. The original RTX 4070 shows scores across multiple test suites: 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 returns 3,854, Geekbench OpenCL returns 154,858, Geekbench Vulkan returns 174,152, and Passmark tests range from 103 in DirectX 12 to 320 in DirectX 9. The AD103 variant has none of these entries, so no direct comparison of compute, rasterization, or API-specific performance is possible from the database.

For use-case analysis, the RTX 4070 can be characterized by its recorded results. The Passmark G3D score of 26,927 and GPU compute score of 14,720 indicate general 3D rendering and compute workloads are covered. The Geekbench Vulkan score of 174,152 versus OpenCL score of 154,858 suggests slightly stronger performance in Vulkan-based applications compared to OpenCL-based ones, though both are substantial. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result of 3,854 provides a DirectX 12 baseline. The AD103 variant cannot be assigned any use-case advantage because no measurements exist.

The Verdict

The database shows the RTX 4070 AD103 as a distinct part with its own specifications, but without benchmark data, any performance verdict must rely on the original RTX 4070's results. The RTX 4070 sits at the 81st percentile among all GPUs in the database, with an average score of 37,648. Its nearest rivals in average score are the NVIDIA Tesla P4 at 37,628 (0.1% slower), the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 at 37,507 (0.4% slower), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile at 38,135 (1.3% faster), and the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 at 37,157 (1.3% slower). These deltas are all within 1.3%, indicating the RTX 4070 sits in a tightly clustered performance band.

For the AD103 variant, the percentile rank of 50 with an average score of 0 places it at the median of the database distribution, but this is an artifact of missing measurements. Anyone choosing between the two cards based on the database would select the original RTX 4070, since it has verified scores and the AD103 has none. However, the specification sheets are nearly identical, which suggests the AD103 is a variant of the same product using a different physical chip. The data does not support a claim that the AD103 performs differently; it only shows that no performance evidence exists for it.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, so there are no direct matched tests comparing the RTX 4070 and the RTX 4070 AD103. The only numerical comparison available is between the original RTX 4070 and its nearest rivals in the database. The RTX 4070 leads the Tesla P4 by 0.1% in average score, leads the RX Vega 56 by 0.4%, leads the PRO W6400 by 1.3%, and trails the RTX 4080 Mobile by 1.3%. These margins are small enough that individual workload differences would likely outweigh the average gap.

Looking at the RTX 4070's individual benchmark spread, the strongest relative result appears in Passmark DirectX 9 at 320, followed by DirectX 11 at 244, DirectX 10 at 139, and DirectX 12 at 103. This ordering is typical for older API tests where newer architectures do not always scale linearly. The Geekbench Vulkan score of 174,152 exceeds the OpenCL score of 154,858 by roughly 12.5%, which is a meaningful gap for compute-oriented users. The 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 3,854 stands as the sole DirectX 12 native result, and the Passmark G2D score of 1,164 covers 2D operations.

Since the AD103 has no benchmark entries, the data cannot show any single win for that card. The original RTX 4070's wins are all recorded, but they are wins against the database's aggregate of other GPUs, not against the AD103 specifically.

FAQ

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

A: No. The RTX 4070 AD103 has an empty benchmarks array, an average benchmark score of 0, and no nearest rivals listed. The original RTX 4070 has ten recorded benchmark scores.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each card?

A: The RTX 4070 has an average benchmark score of 37,648. The RTX 4070 AD103 has an average benchmark score of 0.

Q: How does the RTX 4070 compare to its nearest rivals in average score?

A: The RTX 4070 is 0.1% ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla P4 (37,628), 0.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (37,507), 1.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 (37,157), and 1.3% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile (38,135).

Q: What percentile does each card hold relative to all GPUs?

A: The RTX 4070 is at the 81st percentile. The RTX 4070 AD103 is at the 50th percentile.

Q: Which card has a higher Geekbench Vulkan score?

A: Only the RTX 4070 has a Geekbench Vulkan score, recorded at 174,152. The AD103 has no such score.

Q: Are the memory specifications different between the two cards?

A: No. Both have 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus with 504.2 GB/s bandwidth and a memory clock of 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective).

Architecture Differences

Both cards use the Ada Lovelace architecture and are built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The fundamental difference lies in the physical chip. The RTX 4070 uses the AD104 chip with 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 121.8 million per mm². The RTX 4070 AD103 uses the AD103 chip with 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 121.1 million per mm². The AD103 die is larger by 85 mm² and contains 10,100 million more transistors, yet the transistor density is nearly identical, differing by only 0.7 million per mm².

Despite the different chips, the functional blocks are identical. Both have 5,888 shading units, 184 texture mapping units, 64 raster output units, 46 ray tracing cores, and 184 tensor cores. The pixel rate is 158.4 GPixel/s for both, and the texture rate is 455.4 GTexel/s for both. FP32 compute is 29.15 TFLOPS for both, and FP16 is also 29.15 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. The AD103 chip is normally used in higher-tier products, but in this variant it has been configured to match the AD104-based RTX 4070's enabled resources exactly. The clocks are the same as well: 1920 MHz base and 2475 MHz boost for both.

The production status for both is end-of-life. The release dates differ, with the RTX 4070 released on 2023-04-11 and the RTX 4070 AD103 released on 2024-02-29. Both belong to the GeForce 40 generation, have the GeForce 30 series as predecessor, and GeForce 50 as successor.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets for the two cards are identical in every measured field except for the chip-level details and release date. Both use 12 GB of GDDR6X memory, a 192-bit bus, 504.2 GB/s bandwidth, and 1313 MHz memory clock (21 Gbps effective). Both have the same 5,888 shading units, 184 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 46 RT cores, and 184 tensor cores. Both run at 1920 MHz base and 2475 MHz boost. Both have a TDP of 200 W, a dual-slot cooler, a single 16-pin power connector, and a suggested PSU of 550 W. Both use PCIe 4.0 x16 and have the same display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Physical dimensions match at 240 mm length, 110 mm height, and 40 mm width.

The differences are limited to three fields. The chip is AD104 for the RTX 4070 and AD103 for the AD103 variant. Transistor count is 35,800 million versus 45,900 million. Die size is 294 mm² versus 379 mm². Release date is 2023-04-11 versus 2024-02-29. The launch MSRP is 599 USD for both, and both are marked end-of-life. The transistor density difference (121.8M / mm² versus 121.1M / mm²) is a derived value from the chip size and transistor count, not an independent specification. In practical terms, the AD103 variant is the same product with the same performance envelope on a physically larger chip, but the database contains no measurements to confirm whether the larger chip changes thermal or clock behavior under sustained load.