Component comparison
GeForce RTX 5070 vs GeForce GTX 1050 Ti
GeForce RTX 5070 vs GeForce GTX 1050 Ti — detailed GPU comparison: performance, gaming FPS, specifications.
Advantages
A
GeForce RTX 5070
- + Release year (+9)
- + VRAM (GB) (+4 GB)
- + Bandwidth (GB/s) (+560 GB/s)
- + Memory bus (bit) (+64 bit)
- + TGP / TDP (W) (+25 W)
- + Lithography (nm) (-10 nm)
- + Transistors (M) (+27,800M)
- + CUDA cores (+5376)
- + TMUs (+144)
- + ROPs (+48)
- + FP32 performance (TFLOPS) (+28.69 TFLOPS)
- + Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) (+156.46 GPixel/s)
- + Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) (+415.48 GTexel/s)
- + Energy efficiency (+5.6)
- + PassMark (overall) (+12712)
- + 3DMark Fire Strike (+27464)
- + Normalized score (+28.8)
B
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti
- + Die size (mm²) (+131 mm²)
Detailed spec comparison
| Spec |
Component A
GeForce RTX 5070
|
Component B
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti
|
|---|---|---|
| Release year | 2025 (+9) | 2016 |
| VRAM (GB) | 8 GB (+4 GB) | 4 GB |
| Memory type | GDDR7 | GDDR5 |
| Memory clock (MHz) | 2000 MHz | — |
| Bandwidth (GB/s) | 672 GB/s (+560 GB/s) | 112 GB/s |
| Memory bus (bit) | 192 bit (+64 bit) | 128 bit |
| TGP / TDP (W) | 100 W (+25 W) | 75 W |
| Lithography (nm) | 4 nm (-10 nm) | 14 nm |
| Transistors (M) | 31,100M (+27,800M) | 3,300M |
| Die size (mm²) | 263 mm² | 132 mm² (+131 mm²) |
| Base clock (MHz) | — | — |
| Boost clock (MHz) | — | — |
| CUDA cores | 6,144 (+5376) | 768 |
| TMUs | 192 (+144) | 48 |
| ROPs | 80 (+48) | 32 |
| RT cores | 48 | — |
| Tensor cores | 192 | — |
| FP32 performance (TFLOPS) | 30.87 TFLOPS (+28.69 TFLOPS) | 2.18 TFLOPS |
| Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) | 201.00 GPixel/s (+156.46 GPixel/s) | 44.54 GPixel/s |
| Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) | 482.30 GTexel/s (+415.48 GTexel/s) | 66.82 GTexel/s |
| Energy efficiency | 21.3 (+5.6) | 15.8 |
| PassMark (overall) | 19,075 (+12712) | 6,363 |
| 3DMark Time Spy | — | 2,261 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike | 34,949 (+27464) | 7,485 |
| Geekbench OpenCL | — | 20,654 |
| Geekbench Vulkan | — | 19,790 |
| Normalized score | 69.6 (+28.8) | 40.8 |
Only in component A
DLSS
ReBAR
ray_tracing
In both
CUDA
FPS in games (1080p)
| Game | GeForce RTX 5070 | GeForce GTX 1050 Ti | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Battlefield 5 | 180 FPS | 57 FPS | +215.8% (A) |
| CS:GO | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 300 FPS | 70 FPS | +328.6% (A) |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 170 FPS | 27 FPS | +529.6% (A) |
| Far Cry 5 | 322 FPS | 48 FPS | +570.8% (A) |
| Fortnite | 300 FPS | 75 FPS | +300% (A) |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 270 FPS | 67 FPS | +303% (A) |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 329 FPS | 40 FPS | +722.5% (A) |
| GTA V | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Metro Exodus | 170 FPS | 31 FPS | +448.4% (A) |
| Overwatch | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| PUBG | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 210 FPS | 24 FPS | +775% (A) |
| The Witcher 3 | 436 FPS | 46 FPS | +847.8% (A) |
| Valorant | 400 FPS | 110 FPS | +263.6% (A) |
Specs from public sources (PassMark, Geekbench). FPS measured at 1080p medium settings.
Based on the comparison:
GeForce RTX 5070 wins 17 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).