NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER vs NVIDIA RTX A400 Comparison

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER and NVIDIA RTX A400 target entirely different segments, and the recorded data reflects that split. The RTX 5070 SUPER is a GeForce 50-series part built on Blackwell 2.0, while the RTX A400 is a workstation Ampere card. Benchmark coverage differs: the RTX 5070 SUPER has a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score, whereas the RTX A400 has multiple Geekbench and Passmark results. The data shows one card is a high-throughput renderer, the other a low-power professional display adapter.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5070 SUPER wins outright in raw 3D performance. Its only recorded benchmark, 3dmark_3dmark_steel_nomad_dx12, scores 2690. That result places it in the 18th percentile of all GPUs in the database, meaning most recorded cards score higher, but its nearest rivals are all far older or lower-end parts. The RTX 5070 SUPER sits just 1% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro K1100M (average score 2664) and 1.1% ahead of both the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 (2662) and Intel Arc Pro B50 (2660). It is 1.7% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 440 (2645). In this specific test, the card delivers a narrow but consistent lead over those four rivals.

The RTX A400 wins in compute and API-specific workloads. Its average benchmark score of 6078 is more than double the RTX 5070 SUPER’s 2690, but that average comes from different tests. The A400 records 22844 in Geekbench OpenCL and 22237 in Geekbench Vulkan, both far higher than any single score for the RTX 5070 SUPER. It also posts 5983 in Passmark G3D and 2557 in Passmark GPU Compute. The A400’s percentileVsAllGpus is 35, higher than the RTX 5070 SUPER’s 18, indicating it outperforms a larger share of the database in its own benchmark suite. The A400’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 (average 6077, delta 0%), NVIDIA Quadro P2000 (6049, 0.5% slower), Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 (6117, 0.6% faster), and AMD Radeon 760M (6019, 1% slower). The A400 essentially trades blows with those parts, with a 0.5% lead over the Quadro P2000 and a 1% lead over the Radeon 760M.

The use-case split is clear: the RTX 5070 SUPER wins in a modern DX12 3D benchmark, while the RTX A400 wins in OpenCL, Vulkan, and legacy DirectX tests. For gaming or high-end 3D rendering, the RTX 5070 SUPER is the stronger choice. For professional compute, driver validation, or multi-display setups, the RTX A400 shows broader benchmark coverage and a higher percentile ranking.

Architecture Differences

The RTX 5070 SUPER uses the GB205 chip on a 5 nm TSMC process, with 31,100 million transistors on a 263 mm² die. That yields a transistor density of 118.3 million per mm². The RTX A400 uses the GA107 chip on an 8 nm Samsung process, with 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, for a density of 43.5 million per mm². The RTX 5070 SUPER is built on Blackwell 2.0 architecture, while the RTX A400 uses Ampere. The former belongs to the GeForce 50 generation; the latter is part of Workstation Ampere (Ax000).

Core counts differ sharply. The RTX 5070 SUPER has 6400 shading units, 200 TMUs, 80 ROPs, 50 ray tracing cores, and 200 tensor cores. The RTX A400 has 768 shading units, 24 TMUs, 16 ROPs, 6 ray tracing cores, and 24 tensor cores. The RTX 5070 SUPER’s shading unit count is over 8 times higher, and its tensor core count is over 8 times higher as well. The RTX A400’s RT core count is 6 versus 50, a substantial gap in hardware ray tracing capability.

Clock speeds differ as well. The RTX 5070 SUPER runs at a base clock of 2325 MHz and a boost of 2512 MHz. The RTX A400 runs at 1417 MHz base and 1762 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ: the RTX 5070 SUPER uses 1750 MHz with 28 Gbps effective, while the RTX A400 uses 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective. The process node difference explains part of the clock gap: 5 nm versus 8 nm.

Memory configurations are completely different. The RTX 5070 SUPER carries 18 GB of GDDR7 on a 192-bit bus, yielding 672.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX A400 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 96.00 GB/s. The RTX 5070 SUPER has over 4 times the memory capacity and 7 times the bandwidth. The bus width difference (192-bit vs 64-bit) directly drives this bandwidth gap.

Power delivery and physical design also diverge. The RTX 5070 SUPER has a TDP of 275 W, a dual-slot cooler, and a single 16-pin power connector. The RTX A400 has a TDP of 50 W, a single-slot cooler, and no power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The RTX 5070 SUPER uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the RTX A400 uses PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs differ: the RTX 5070 SUPER has 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b, while the RTX A400 has 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

There are no direct head-to-head benchmark results in the database; the two cards were not tested on identical workloads. Instead, the data provides separate suites. The RTX 5070 SUPER’s single test is 3dmark_3dmark_steel_nomad_dx12 with a score of 2690. The RTX A400’s closest comparable tests are Passmark DirectX 12 (score 27) and Passmark DirectX 11 (37). Those scores are not directly comparable because they use different metrics, but they indicate the RTX A400 is not a strong DX12 performer. The RTX 5070 SUPER’s 2690 in a modern DX12 test confirms a far higher 3D throughput.

The RTX A400’s strongest wins come in compute and API-agnostic tests. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 22844 and Vulkan score of 22237 dwarf any RTX 5070 SUPER result, but those tests are absent for the RTX 5070 SUPER. The RTX A400 also scores 5983 in Passmark G3D and 2557 in Passmark GPU Compute, both outperforming the RTX 5070 SUPER’s single score in absolute terms. However, the Passmark tests are legacy-oriented (DirectX 9 through 12), and the RTX 5070 SUPER was not run on them.

The biggest wins each way come from workload selection. The RTX 5070 SUPER wins the modern 3D race by a wide margin if one assumes its 2690 in Steel Nomad translates to typical DX12 gaming performance; its nearest rivals are all sub-2700, so it leads that test by 1% to 1.7%. The RTX A400 wins in raw compute throughput, with its OpenCL score of 22844 representing a 33x lead over the RTX 5070 SUPER’s 2690, but again the tests differ. The data shows no overlap, so the verdict rests on which benchmark suite matters more to the user.

The Verdict

The data indicates two separate buyers. The RTX 5070 SUPER is for anyone needing high-end 3D performance in modern DX12 workloads. Its 2690 Steel Nomad score, while only 18th percentile, beats its nearest rivals (Quadro K1100M, GT 1030, Arc Pro B50, GT 440) by margins from 1% to 1.7%. The card’s 6400 shading units, 50 RT cores, 200 tensor cores, and 672.0 GB/s bandwidth support heavy graphics loads. The 275 W TDP and dual-slot design confirm it is a performance part.

The RTX A400 is for professional workstations requiring low power and multi-display output. Its 50 W TDP, single-slot size, and no power connectors make it easy to install in compact systems. Its 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs exceed the RTX 5070 SUPER’s 3x DisplayPort plus HDMI. Its benchmark results show competence in OpenCL (22844) and Vulkan (22237), placing it in the 35th percentile. Its nearest rivals (MX230, Quadro P2000, Iris Pro 6200, Radeon 760M) are all within 1% of its average score, meaning it is competitive in its class.

Neither card is a direct replacement for the other. The RTX 5070 SUPER lacks the A400’s workstation-oriented multi-display and low-power features. The A400 lacks the RTX 5070 SUPER’s raw shading and memory throughput. From the recorded data, the RTX 5070 SUPER is the better choice for gaming or high-fidelity rendering, while the RTX A400 suits CAD, office, or compute tasks that favor OpenCL/Vulkan and low power draw.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw FP32 performance?

A: The RTX 5070 SUPER delivers 32.15 TFLOPS FP32, while the RTX A400 delivers 2.706 TFLOPS FP32, a 12x difference.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The RTX 5070 SUPER has 18 GB of GDDR7 on a 192-bit bus, and the RTX A400 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The RTX 5070 SUPER has a TDP of 275 W, while the RTX A400 has a TDP of 50 W. The A400 requires no power connectors, while the RTX 5070 SUPER uses a single 16-pin connector.

Q: Which card has a higher percentile ranking in the database?

A: The RTX A400 sits in the 35th percentile, while the RTX 5070 SUPER sits in the 18th percentile.

Q: What are the closest rivals for each card?

A: For the RTX 5070 SUPER, the nearest rival is the NVIDIA Quadro K1100M (1% slower). For the RTX A400, the nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 (0% difference).

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Specification Differences

| Field | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER | NVIDIA RTX A400 |

|-------|-------------------------------|-----------------|

| Architecture | Blackwell 2.0 | Ampere |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 8 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Samsung |

| Transistors | 31,100 million | 8,700 million |

| Die Size | 263 mm² | 200 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 118.3M / mm² | 43.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 2325 MHz | 1417 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2512 MHz | 1762 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz 28 Gbps effective | 1500 MHz 12 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 18 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR7 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 192 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 672.0 GB/s | 96.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 6400 | 768 |

| TMUs | 200 | 24 |

| ROPs | 80 | 16 |

| RT Cores | 50 | 6 |

| Tensor Cores | 200 | 24 |

| Pixel Rate | 201.0 GPixel/s | 28.19 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 502.4 GTexel/s | 42.29 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 32.15 TFLOPS | 2.706 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 32.15 TFLOPS (1:1) | 2.706 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 275 W | 50 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 16-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Length | 245 mm (9.6 inches) | 163 mm (6.4 inches) |

| Height | 115 mm (4.5 inches) | 69 mm (2.7 inches) |

| Width | 40 mm (1.6 inches) | Not listed |

| Release Date | 2025-12-31 | 2024-04-15 |