Component comparison
GeForce RTX 4070 vs Quadro T1000
GeForce RTX 4070 vs Quadro T1000 — detailed GPU comparison: performance, gaming FPS, specifications.
Advantages
A
GeForce RTX 4070
- + Release year (+4)
- + VRAM (GB) (+4 GB)
- + Memory bus (bit) (+64 bit)
- + TGP / TDP (W) (+65 W)
- + Lithography (nm) (-7 nm)
- + CUDA cores (+5120)
- + Energy efficiency (+7.3)
- + PassMark (overall) (+12976)
- + Geekbench OpenCL (+134845)
- + Geekbench Vulkan (+129560)
- + Normalized score (+38.6)
B
Quadro T1000
- + Memory clock (MHz) (+6000 MHz)
Detailed spec comparison
| Spec |
Component A
GeForce RTX 4070
|
Component B
Quadro T1000
|
|---|---|---|
| Release year | 2023 (+4) | 2019 |
| VRAM (GB) | 8 GB (+4 GB) | 4 GB |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Memory clock (MHz) | 2000 MHz | 8000 MHz (+6000 MHz) |
| Bandwidth (GB/s) | 504 GB/s | — |
| Memory bus (bit) | 192 bit (+64 bit) | 128 bit |
| TGP / TDP (W) | 115 W (+65 W) | 50 W |
| Lithography (nm) | 5 nm (-7 nm) | 12 nm |
| Transistors (M) | 35,800M | — |
| Die size (mm²) | 294 mm² | — |
| Base clock (MHz) | — | — |
| Boost clock (MHz) | — | 1455 MHz |
| CUDA cores | 5,888 (+5120) | 768 |
| TMUs | 184 | — |
| ROPs | 64 | — |
| RT cores | 46 | — |
| Tensor cores | 184 | — |
| FP32 performance (TFLOPS) | 29.15 TFLOPS | — |
| Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) | 158.40 GPixel/s | — |
| Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) | 455.40 GTexel/s | — |
| Energy efficiency | 31.5 (+7.3) | 24.1 |
| PassMark (overall) | 19,489 (+12976) | 6,513 |
| 3DMark Time Spy | 11,960 | — |
| 3DMark Fire Strike | 30,051 | — |
| Geekbench OpenCL | 168,695 (+134845) | 33,850 |
| Geekbench Vulkan | 159,285 (+129560) | 29,725 |
| Normalized score | 84.5 (+38.6) | 45.9 |
Only in component A
DLSS
ReBAR
ray_tracing
In both
CUDA
FPS in games (1080p)
| Game | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro T1000 | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anno 1800 | 92 FPS | 37 FPS | +148.6% (A) |
| Battlefield 5 | 140 FPS | 38 FPS | +268.4% (A) |
| Borderlands 3 | 107 FPS | 38 FPS | +181.6% (A) |
| CS:GO | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| Dota 2 | 178 FPS | 113 FPS | +57.5% (A) |
| Escape from Tarkov | 120 FPS | 68 FPS | +76.5% (A) |
| Far Cry 5 | 139 FPS | 57 FPS | +143.9% (A) |
| Far Cry New Dawn | 102 FPS | 46 FPS | +121.7% (A) |
| Final Fantasy XV Benchmark | 41 FPS | 31 FPS | +32.3% (A) |
| GTA V | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| GTA V | 134 FPS | 94 FPS | +42.6% (A) |
| Metro Exodus | 111 FPS | 32 FPS | +246.9% (A) |
| Overwatch | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| PUBG | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 149 FPS | 40 FPS | +272.5% (A) |
| The Witcher 3 | 124 FPS | 53 FPS | +134% (A) |
| Total War: Three Kingdoms | 133 FPS | 38 FPS | +250% (A) |
| X-Plane 11.11 | 52 FPS | 57 FPS | 9.6% (B) |
Specs from public sources (PassMark, Geekbench). FPS measured at 1080p medium settings.
Based on the comparison:
GeForce RTX 4070 wins 11 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).