Component comparison
GeForce RTX 4070 vs GeForce RTX 5060
GeForce RTX 4070 vs GeForce RTX 5060 — detailed GPU comparison: performance, gaming FPS, specifications.
Advantages
A
GeForce RTX 4070
- + Memory clock (MHz) (+500 MHz)
- + Bandwidth (GB/s) (+56 GB/s)
- + Memory bus (bit) (+64 bit)
- + TGP / TDP (W) (+70 W)
- + Transistors (M) (+13,900M)
- + CUDA cores (+2048)
- + TMUs (+64)
- + ROPs (+16)
- + RT cores (+16)
- + Tensor cores (+64)
- + FP32 performance (TFLOPS) (+9.97 TFLOPS)
- + Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) (+38.50 GPixel/s)
- + Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) (+155.80 GTexel/s)
- + PassMark (overall) (+2740)
- + Normalized score (+34.2)
B
GeForce RTX 5060
- + Release year (+2)
- + Die size (mm²) (+113 mm²)
- + Energy efficiency (+37.7)
- + 3DMark Fire Strike (+1315)
Detailed spec comparison
| Spec |
Component A
GeForce RTX 4070
|
Component B
GeForce RTX 5060
|
|---|---|---|
| Release year | 2023 | 2025 (+2) |
| VRAM (GB) | 8 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR7 |
| Memory clock (MHz) | 2000 MHz (+500 MHz) | 1500 MHz |
| Bandwidth (GB/s) | 504 GB/s (+56 GB/s) | 448 GB/s |
| Memory bus (bit) | 192 bit (+64 bit) | 128 bit |
| TGP / TDP (W) | 115 W (+70 W) | 45 W |
| Lithography (nm) | 5 nm | 5 nm |
| Transistors (M) | 35,800M (+13,900M) | 21,900M |
| Die size (mm²) | 294 mm² | 181 mm² (+113 mm²) |
| Base clock (MHz) | — | — |
| Boost clock (MHz) | — | — |
| CUDA cores | 5,888 (+2048) | 3,840 |
| TMUs | 184 (+64) | 120 |
| ROPs | 64 (+16) | 48 |
| RT cores | 46 (+16) | 30 |
| Tensor cores | 184 (+64) | 120 |
| FP32 performance (TFLOPS) | 29.15 TFLOPS (+9.97 TFLOPS) | 19.18 TFLOPS |
| Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) | 158.40 GPixel/s (+38.50 GPixel/s) | 119.90 GPixel/s |
| Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) | 455.40 GTexel/s (+155.80 GTexel/s) | 299.60 GTexel/s |
| Energy efficiency | 31.5 | 69.2 (+37.7) |
| PassMark (overall) | 19,489 (+2740) | 16,749 |
| 3DMark Time Spy | 11,960 | — |
| 3DMark Fire Strike | 30,051 | 31,366 (+1315) |
| Geekbench OpenCL | 168,695 | — |
| Geekbench Vulkan | 159,285 | — |
| Normalized score | 84.5 (+34.2) | 50.3 |
In both
CUDA
DLSS
ReBAR
ray_tracing
FPS in games (1080p)
| Game | GeForce RTX 4070 | GeForce RTX 5060 | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Battlefield 5 | 140 FPS | 130 FPS | +7.7% (A) |
| CS:GO | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 250 FPS | 220 FPS | +13.6% (A) |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 135 FPS | 95 FPS | +42.1% (A) |
| Escape from Tarkov | 120 FPS | 120 FPS | ≈ |
| Far Cry 5 | 139 FPS | 130 FPS | +6.9% (A) |
| Fortnite | 200 FPS | 170 FPS | +17.6% (A) |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 180 FPS | 150 FPS | +20% (A) |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 190 FPS | 255 FPS | 34.2% (B) |
| GTA V | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Metro Exodus | 111 FPS | 95 FPS | +16.8% (A) |
| Overwatch | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| PUBG | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 160 FPS | 110 FPS | +45.5% (A) |
| The Witcher 3 | 229 FPS | 140 FPS | +63.6% (A) |
| Valorant | 260 FPS | 230 FPS | +13% (A) |
Specs from public sources (PassMark, Geekbench). FPS measured at 1080p medium settings.
Based on the comparison:
GeForce RTX 4070 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).