NVIDIA CMP 30HX vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database records two compute workloads for these cards, and the results are unambiguous. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation scores 124812 against the NVIDIA CMP 30HX's 65199, a 91.4% advantage. That is not a marginal gap; it is nearly double the raw compute output. The Vulkan test tells a similar story, with the RTX 4000 SFF posting 109364 versus 62484 for the CMP 30HX, a 75% lead. The RTX 4000 SFF wins both recorded tests, giving it a 2-0 sweep in head-to-head comparisons.

Contextualizing the RTX 4000 SFF's performance, its average benchmark score of 117088 places it in the 95th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GB10 at 117393 (a 0.3% deficit), the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 at 118976 (1.6% behind), the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB at 114395 (2.4% ahead), and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile at 113944 (2.8% ahead). The RTX 4000 SFF sits in a tight cluster, within roughly three points of four capable competitors, which indicates it is a well-balanced performer at the top tier.

The CMP 30HX, by contrast, averages 63842 across its benchmark runs, landing in the 89th percentile. Its nearest rivals are clustered much closer: the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP at 63830 (0% difference), the AMD Radeon RX 7600M at 63775 (0.1% behind), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 at 63693 (0.2% behind), and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 at 64212 (0.6% ahead). The CMP 30HX is effectively at parity with these cards, which means it sits in a competitive but crowded mid-tier segment. The practical takeaway is straightforward: the RTX 4000 SFF outclasses the CMP 30HX by a wide margin in both OpenCL and Vulkan workloads, and the delta is large enough to define entirely different performance classes.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation scores 124812 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 91.4% higher than the NVIDIA CMP 30HX's 65199. The RTX 4000 SFF wins this test decisively.

Q: How does the Vulkan performance compare between these two cards?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 4000 SFF scores 109364, while the CMP 30HX scores 62484. The RTX 4000 SFF leads by 75%, a substantial margin that mirrors its OpenCL advantage.

Q: What are the percentile ranks for each GPU in the database?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF sits in the 95th percentile of all GPUs, while the CMP 30HX ranks in the 89th percentile. This places the RTX 4000 SFF firmly in the top tier, with the CMP 30HX just below it in the broader distribution.

Q: Are there any benchmark tests where the CMP 30HX outperforms the RTX 4000 SFF?

A: No. The database records two benchmark tests (OpenCL and Vulkan), and the RTX 4000 SFF wins both. The head-to-head comparison shows 2 wins for the RTX 4000 SFF and 0 wins for the CMP 30HX.

Q: How close is the RTX 4000 SFF to its nearest rival in average score?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF's average benchmark score is 117088, and its closest rival is the NVIDIA GB10 at 117393, a difference of only 0.3%. The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 trails by 1.6%, while the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB and NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile lead by 2.4% and 2.8% respectively.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two cards?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF averages 117088, while the CMP 30HX averages 63842. The difference is 53246 points, which corresponds to an 83.4% higher average score for the RTX 4000 SFF.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and target entirely different workloads. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation uses the AD104 chip built on Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm process. It packs 35,800 million transistors into a 294 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 121.8 million per square millimeter. The CMP 30HX uses the TU116 chip based on Turing architecture, also from TSMC but on a 12 nm process. It contains 6,600 million transistors on a 284 mm² die, with a density of 23.2 million per square millimeter. The process node difference alone explains much of the performance gap, as the 5 nm node allows for far greater transistor density and efficiency.

The compute resources diverge sharply. The RTX 4000 SFF has 6144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, 64 raster output units, 48 ray tracing cores, and 192 tensor cores. The CMP 30HX has 1408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, but it has no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. This makes the RTX 4000 SFF a fully featured workstation GPU with hardware acceleration for ray tracing and AI workloads, while the CMP 30HX is a stripped-down mining card with no display outputs and no RT or tensor hardware.

Clock speeds tell a different part of the story. The CMP 30HX actually runs at higher clocks, with a base of 1530 MHz and a boost of 1785 MHz, compared to the RTX 4000 SFF's 720 MHz base and 1560 MHz boost. The RTX 4000 SFF compensates with far more cores and a more efficient architecture, delivering higher throughput despite lower clocks. Memory configurations also differ: the RTX 4000 SFF has 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus with 280.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the CMP 30HX has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 336.0 GB/s bandwidth. The CMP 30HX has higher raw bandwidth, but the RTX 4000 SFF's larger capacity and newer architecture make it more suitable for modern workloads.

The power and interface profiles are distinct as well. The RTX 4000 SFF draws 70 W with no power connectors, requiring only a 250 W suggested PSU, and uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface. The CMP 30HX draws 125 W, needs a single 8-pin connector, suggests a 300 W PSU, and runs on a PCIe 1.0 x4 interface. That bus interface is a significant limitation for the CMP 30HX, as it severely constrains data transfer speeds. The RTX 4000 SFF also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the CMP 30HX only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1) with the same Vulkan 1.4 support.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is the superior compute card by a wide margin, winning both recorded benchmarks with leads of 91.4% in OpenCL and 75% in Vulkan. It also carries the architectural features needed for professional workstation use: ray tracing cores, tensor cores, a 20 GB memory pool, and a compact 168 mm dual-slot design with four mini-DisplayPort outputs. Its 70 W power draw and lack of external power connectors make it an easy fit in constrained systems, and its 95th percentile ranking places it among the fastest GPUs in the database.

The CMP 30HX, by contrast, is an end-of-life mining GPU with no display outputs and no ray tracing or tensor hardware. Its 89th percentile ranking is respectable, but its nearest rivals are all within 0.6% of its average score, meaning it is not a standout even in its own tier. The PCIe 1.0 x4 interface is a bottleneck for any data-intensive task, and the 6 GB memory capacity is modest by modern standards. Its 125 W power draw and 8-pin connector requirement are also less convenient than the RTX 4000 SFF's plug-and-play design.

For anyone choosing between these two, the RTX 4000 SFF is the only sensible option for compute, rendering, or any task that benefits from modern GPU features. The CMP 30HX might still function in a legacy mining setup, but its lack of outputs and outdated architecture limit its usefulness elsewhere. The RTX 4000 SFF is also the newer product, released in March 2023 versus the CMP 30HX's February 2021 debut, and it remains active in production while the CMP 30HX is end-of-life.

Specification Differences

The specification tables highlight the fundamental divergence between these two GPUs.

• Chip and architecture: The RTX 4000 SFF uses the AD104 chip on Ada Lovelace architecture, while the CMP 30HX uses the TU116 chip on Turing architecture.
• Process node: The RTX 4000 SFF is built on a 5 nm TSMC process, the CMP 30HX on a 12 nm TSMC process.
• Transistor count and density: The RTX 4000 SFF has 35,800 million transistors at 121.8M per mm²; the CMP 30HX has 6,600 million at 23.2M per mm².
• Die size: The RTX 4000 SFF measures 294 mm², the CMP 30HX measures 284 mm².
• Base clock: 720 MHz for the RTX 4000 SFF, 1530 MHz for the CMP 30HX.
• Boost clock: 1560 MHz for the RTX 4000 SFF, 1785 MHz for the CMP 30HX.
• Memory size: 20 GB for the RTX 4000 SFF, 6 GB for the CMP 30HX.
• Memory bus: 160-bit for the RTX 4000 SFF, 192-bit for the CMP 30HX.
• Memory bandwidth: 280.0 GB/s for the RTX 4000 SFF, 336.0 GB/s for the CMP 30HX.
• Shading units: 6144 for the RTX 4000 SFF, 1408 for the CMP 30HX.
• Texture mapping units: 192 vs 88.
• Raster output units: 64 vs 48.
• Ray tracing cores: 48 for the RTX 4000 SFF, none for the CMP 30HX.
• Tensor cores: 192 for the RTX 4000 SFF, none for the CMP 30HX.
• Pixel rate: 99.84 GPixel/s vs 85.68 GPixel/s.
• Texture rate: 299.5 GTexel/s vs 157.1 GTexel/s.
• FP32 performance: 19.17 TFLOPS vs 5.027 TFLOPS.
• FP16 performance: 19.17 TFLOPS (1:1) for the RTX 4000 SFF, 10.05 TFLOPS (2:1) for the CMP 30HX.
• TDP: 70 W vs 125 W.
• Power connectors: None for the RTX 4000 SFF, 1x 8-pin for the CMP 30HX.
• Suggested PSU: 250 W vs 300 W.
• Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 vs PCIe 1.0 x4.
• Display outputs: 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a vs no outputs.
• DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) vs 12 (12_1).
• Dimensions: The RTX 4000 SFF is 168 mm long and 69 mm high; the CMP 30HX is 229 mm long, 111 mm high, and 35 mm wide.
• Production status: Active for the RTX 4000 SFF, end-of-life for the CMP 30HX.
• Release date: The RTX 4000 SFF launched on March 20, 2023; the CMP 30HX on February 24, 2021.
• Launch MSRP: The CMP 30HX had a launch MSRP of 799 USD; the RTX 4000 SFF has no recorded launch MSRP.