Leaderboard Β· All comparisons Β· LynxBenchAI 26Q3 Index

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 vs NVIDIA A40 for AI

Device pages: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Β· NVIDIA A40

On the LynxBenchAI 26Q3 Index, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 scores 1.09x the NVIDIA A40 overall (Training 0.82x, Inference 1.20x, Compute 1.62x). It leads on Inference and Compute and trails on Training.

Scores on the LynxBenchAI 26Q3 Index

Ratio = the RTX 4070's score divided by the A40's
ScoreRatioRTX 4070A40
Overall (GT)1.09x201.71184.52
Training0.82x154.20187.96
Inference1.20x297.87248.17
Compute1.62x154.6695.41
  • Runs on the RTX 4070 only: FP8 inference.

Per Model and Precision

Sustained throughput per model and precision; ratio = RTX 4070 / A40
ModelPrecisionRatioRTX 4070A40
compute
Dense MatMulBF160.78x114.71146.46
Dense MatMulFP160.79x113.86144.11
Dense MatMulFP320.49x102.23209.02
Dense MatMulFP640.94x3.273.48
Sparse MatMulFP323.10x262.7684.89
Sparse MatMulFP644.91x288.6258.80
inference
DistilBERTFP160.80x421.72527.07
DistilBERTFP8n/a285.20not run
DistilBERTINT80.92x255.90277.68
DistilGPT2FP160.75x390.25523.46
DistilGPT2FP8n/a247.53not run
DistilGPT2INT81.00x247.62248.53
Flan-T5 SmallFP160.87x557.15640.51
Flan-T5 SmallFP8n/a412.59not run
Flan-T5 SmallINT81.14x326.40286.79
GraphGPS (Peptides)FP160.93x170.74182.67
GraphGPS (Peptides)FP8n/a85.78not run
GraphGPS (Peptides)INT80.84x82.5398.21
MobileNetV3FP161.07x732.42682.36
MobileNetV3INT81.09x207.89190.06
training
DistilBERTBF160.71x204.93290.50
DistilBERTFP320.69x255.66368.16
DistilGPT2BF160.77x125.27162.03
DistilGPT2FP320.71x202.74283.93
Flan-T5 SmallBF160.99x129.44131.34
Flan-T5 SmallFP320.89x214.24240.41
GraphGPS (Peptides)BF160.87x77.8489.45
GraphGPS (Peptides)FP320.81x71.3388.52
MobileNetV3BF160.98x147.87150.47
MobileNetV3FP320.91x198.59217.79

Related Comparisons

Each figure is the first device's overall score divided by the second's.

Measure your own machine: pip install lynxbench-ai Β· Install guide β†’

How to Read These Results

A LynxBenchAI score is sustained throughput on a fixed catalogue of PyTorch models, measured after a warm-up at a batch size raised until throughput stops improving, so it is what the machine holds under load, not its best instant. Training, Inference and Compute are three separate scores; GT combines them (Training and Inference weigh 0.4 each, Compute 0.2).

Every run uses the stock, publicly released PyTorch stack, so a result is broadly indicative of the out-of-the-box PyTorch experience on that hardware, and so of custom PyTorch models too. It does not run your own model, and it is not a vendor-tuned peak like an MLPerf submission.

Scores compare only within one Index: the 26Q3 Index fixes the models, precisions, correctness thresholds and scoring, and a later Index may change them. Each test is one timed window, the scores have no 0-100 scale, and a precision a device cannot run scores zero rather than being skipped.

LynxBenchAI is built by TechnoLynx, which the European Commission engaged as an independent expert advisor on AI performance and benchmarking for AI Gigafactories under the EuroHPC Joint Undertaking (case study).

Questions

Is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 faster than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 for AI?
On the LynxBenchAI 26Q3 Index, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 scores 1.01x the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 overall (Training 1.35x, Inference 0.99x, Compute 0.56x). It leads on Training and trails on Inference and Compute.
Where is the difference between the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 largest?
On the LynxBenchAI 26Q3 Index, the ratio is highest on GraphGPS (Peptides) at INT8 (Inference), where the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 scores 1.73x the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070, and lowest on Sparse MatMul at FP64 (Compute), at 0.22x.
Which precisions run on only one of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070?
On the LynxBenchAI 26Q3 Index, only the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 runs FP8 inference; a precision a device cannot execute scores zero.
What does this result tell me about my own PyTorch model?
Every run uses the stock, publicly released PyTorch stack, so a result is broadly indicative of the out-of-the-box PyTorch experience on that hardware, and so of custom PyTorch models too. It does not run your own model, and it is not a vendor-tuned peak like an MLPerf submission.

The Personal Edition submits your benchmark results to TechnoLynx's servers as part of participating in the public leaderboard. If that isn't acceptable for your use case, contact TechnoLynx about Press, Pro, or Enterprise licenses.

Get Started