Component comparison
GeForce RTX 4060 vs GeForce RTX 5070
GeForce RTX 4060 vs GeForce RTX 5070 — detailed GPU comparison: performance, gaming FPS, specifications.
Advantages
A
GeForce RTX 4060
- + TGP / TDP (W) (+15 W)
- + Die size (mm²) (+104 mm²)
- + Energy efficiency (+6.7)
- + Normalized score (+6.3)
B
GeForce RTX 5070
- + Release year (+2)
- + Bandwidth (GB/s) (+400 GB/s)
- + Memory bus (bit) (+64 bit)
- + Lithography (nm) (-1 nm)
- + Transistors (M) (+12,200M)
- + CUDA cores (+3072)
- + TMUs (+96)
- + ROPs (+32)
- + RT cores (+24)
- + Tensor cores (+96)
- + FP32 performance (TFLOPS) (+15.76 TFLOPS)
- + Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) (+82.90 GPixel/s)
- + Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) (+246.10 GTexel/s)
- + PassMark (overall) (+1720)
- + 3DMark Fire Strike (+8419)
Detailed spec comparison
| Spec |
Component A
GeForce RTX 4060
|
Component B
GeForce RTX 5070
|
|---|---|---|
| Release year | 2023 | 2025 (+2) |
| VRAM (GB) | 8 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR7 |
| Memory clock (MHz) | 2000 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| Bandwidth (GB/s) | 272 GB/s | 672 GB/s (+400 GB/s) |
| Memory bus (bit) | 128 bit | 192 bit (+64 bit) |
| TGP / TDP (W) | 115 W (+15 W) | 100 W |
| Lithography (nm) | 5 nm | 4 nm (-1 nm) |
| Transistors (M) | 18,900M | 31,100M (+12,200M) |
| Die size (mm²) | 159 mm² (+104 mm²) | 263 mm² |
| Base clock (MHz) | — | — |
| Boost clock (MHz) | — | — |
| CUDA cores | 3,072 | 6,144 (+3072) |
| TMUs | 96 | 192 (+96) |
| ROPs | 48 | 80 (+32) |
| RT cores | 24 | 48 (+24) |
| Tensor cores | 96 | 192 (+96) |
| FP32 performance (TFLOPS) | 15.11 TFLOPS | 30.87 TFLOPS (+15.76 TFLOPS) |
| Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) | 118.10 GPixel/s | 201.00 GPixel/s (+82.90 GPixel/s) |
| Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) | 236.20 GTexel/s | 482.30 GTexel/s (+246.10 GTexel/s) |
| Energy efficiency | 28.0 (+6.7) | 21.3 |
| PassMark (overall) | 17,355 | 19,075 (+1720) |
| 3DMark Time Spy | 10,329 | — |
| 3DMark Fire Strike | 26,530 | 34,949 (+8419) |
| Geekbench OpenCL | 101,654 | — |
| Geekbench Vulkan | 99,998 | — |
| Normalized score | 75.9 (+6.3) | 69.6 |
In both
CUDA
DLSS
ReBAR
ray_tracing
FPS in games (1080p)
| Game | GeForce RTX 4060 | GeForce RTX 5070 | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Battlefield 5 | 130 FPS | 180 FPS | 38.5% (B) |
| CS:GO | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 195 FPS | 300 FPS | 53.8% (B) |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 123 FPS | 170 FPS | 38.2% (B) |
| Far Cry 5 | 128 FPS | 322 FPS | 151.6% (B) |
| Fortnite | 180 FPS | 300 FPS | 66.7% (B) |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 160 FPS | 270 FPS | 68.8% (B) |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 238 FPS | 329 FPS | 38.2% (B) |
| GTA V | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Metro Exodus | 25 FPS | 170 FPS | 580% (B) |
| Overwatch | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| PUBG | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 124 FPS | 210 FPS | 69.4% (B) |
| The Witcher 3 | 191 FPS | 436 FPS | 128.3% (B) |
| Valorant | 240 FPS | 400 FPS | 66.7% (B) |
Specs from public sources (PassMark, Geekbench). FPS measured at 1080p medium settings.
Based on the comparison:
GeForce RTX 5070 wins 15 of the comparable criteria.
The choice depends on your use case.
🤔 How to choose
Universal advice for any use case.
- Reliability vs price: reliability (median 50) ↔ price (median 385.1).
- Weight vs CPU: mobility (median 48) ↔ overall performance (median 49.8).
- Upgradeability vs battery: upgradability (median 50) ↔ battery life (median 2.8).