NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 occupy vastly different tiers of the GPU landscape, separated by seven years of product cycles and a chasm in raw compute capability. The data confirms that the GTX 970 is the dominant performer in every measurable category where both cards have been tested, while the GT 1010 serves as a fundamentally different class of product. With only a single shared benchmark result, the comparison is stark and unambiguous, though the architectural and specification gaps provide rich context for their respective positions.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available between these two cards is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are decisively lopsided. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 scores 29,982 points, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 manages 6,698 points. This translates to a delta of 347.6% in favor of the GTX 970 — the older card outperforms its younger counterpart by a factor of roughly 4.5 in this compute-oriented workload. This is not a marginal victory; it represents a generational and architectural canyon that no amount of driver optimization or clock-speed advantage could bridge.

Contextualizing the GTX 970’s score, its average benchmark score across all tested workloads is 7,157, placing it in the 39th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 with an average score of 7,170 (a -0.2% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE at 7,171 (-0.2%), and the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile at 7,203 (-0.6%). These figures suggest that while the GTX 970 is by no means a top-tier card in the absolute sense, it holds its own against a cluster of mid-range integrated and discrete solutions.

The GT 1010, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 6,698, which lands it in the 38th percentile of all GPUs — a narrow 1-percentile gap below the GTX 970. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R7 M370 at 6,764 (-1% delta), the AMD Radeon R7 M460 at 6,612 (+1.3%), and the AMD Radeon HD 7730M at 6,581 (+1.8%). The fact that the GT 1010’s average score is dragged down by having only one benchmark entry is notable; in the OpenCL test specifically, the GTX 970’s score is more than four times higher, which is a far more meaningful comparison than the percentile standings suggest.

The head-to-head tally is 1 win for the GTX 970 and 0 for the GT 1010. There are no other shared benchmarks in the data, so the OpenCL result stands as the sole quantitative battle — and it is a rout. The GTX 970’s 3.920 TFLOPS of FP32 compute versus the GT 1010’s 751.6 GFLOPS explains the OpenCL outcome perfectly; raw shader throughput alone accounts for a 5.2x theoretical advantage, and the benchmark delta of 347.6% aligns with that expectation once memory bandwidth and other overheads are factored in.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the GTX 970 than the GT 1010 in the only shared benchmark?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 970 scores 29,982 points against the GT 1010’s 6,698 points, yielding a delta of 347.6% in favor of the GTX 970.

Q: What are the percentile standings for each card relative to all GPUs?

A: The GTX 970 sits in the 39th percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 7,157. The GT 1010 sits in the 38th percentile with an average score of 6,698 — a one-percentile difference that belies the massive gap in their single shared test.

Q: Which cards are the closest rivals to the GTX 970 based on average score?

A: The nearest rivals are the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 (7,170 average, -0.2% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE (7,171, -0.2%), and the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile (7,203, -0.6%). All are within 1% of the GTX 970’s average score.

Q: How does the GT 1010 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GT 1010’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R7 M370 (6,764 average, -1% delta), the AMD Radeon R7 M460 (6,612, +1.3%), and the AMD Radeon HD 7730M (6,581, +1.8%). The GT 1010 is slightly ahead of the R7 M460 and HD 7730M but trails the R7 M370.

Q: Does the GT 1010 have any benchmark where it beats the GTX 970?

A: No. The data shows 1 win for the GTX 970 and 0 wins for the GT 1010 across all head-to-head benchmark comparisons available.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each card, and how do they relate to their percentiles?

A: The GTX 970 has an average benchmark score of 7,157, placing it in the 39th percentile. The GT 1010 has an average score of 6,698, placing it in the 38th percentile. Despite the 459-point average score difference, both cards land within one percentile of each other, indicating they are both near the lower-middle range of the GPU performance distribution.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 970 wins in every category where data exists, but its advantages are most pronounced in compute-heavy workloads. The OpenCL score of 29,982 versus 6,698 is the headline result, and it reflects the GTX 970’s 1664 shading units and 104 texture mapping units operating at a 1050 MHz base and 1178 MHz boost clock. The GT 1010’s 256 shading units and 16 TMUs, even at a higher 1228 MHz base and 1468 MHz boost, cannot compensate for the sheer parallel throughput difference. For any task involving general-purpose GPU compute — physics simulations, video encoding, or scientific calculations — the GTX 970 is categorically superior.

In terms of memory, the GTX 970 offers 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 224.4 GB/s of bandwidth, compared to the GT 1010’s 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus with 48.06 GB/s. This 4.7x bandwidth advantage means the GTX 970 will also win decisively in memory-bound scenarios such as high-resolution textures, large framebuffers, and multi-sample anti-aliasing. The GT 1010, with its single-slot design, 30 W TDP, and no power connectors, is best suited for basic display output, legacy system upgrades, or low-resolution media playback — tasks where its smaller footprint and minimal power draw are assets rather than liabilities.

The GT 1010’s only theoretical win is in efficiency per watt; at 30 W TDP versus 148 W for the GTX 970, it delivers a fraction of the performance at a fifth of the power draw. However, the benchmark data does not include any power-normalized scores, so this remains a qualitative observation rather than a measured performance advantage. The GT 1010 also wins on physical dimensions at 147 mm length versus 267 mm for the GTX 970, making it the clear choice for small-form-factor or low-profile builds where space is at a premium.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge sharply on nearly every specification that matters. The GTX 970 uses the GM204 chip built on TSMC’s 28 nm process, while the GT 1010 uses the GP108 chip on Samsung’s 14 nm node — a process generation jump that allows the newer card to pack 24.3M transistors per mm² versus 13.1M / mm² for the older chip. However, the GTX 970 compensates with sheer size: 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die versus 1,800 million on 74 mm² for the GT 1010.

Clock speeds tell an interesting story of trade-offs. The GT 1010 has a higher base clock at 1228 MHz versus 1050 MHz, and a higher boost clock at 1468 MHz versus 1178 MHz. Yet the GTX 970’s far larger execution resources — 1664 shading units versus 256, 104 TMUs versus 16, and 56 ROPs versus 8 — overwhelm the clock-speed advantage. The pixel rate of 65.97 GPixel/s for the GTX 970 dwarfs the 11.74 GPixel/s of the GT 1010, and the texture rate of 122.5 GTexel/s versus 23.49 GTexel/s tells the same story.

Memory configurations are also worlds apart: 4 GB of GDDR5 at 7 Gbps effective on a 256-bit bus for the GTX 970, versus 2 GB of GDDR5 at 6 Gbps effective on a 64-bit bus for the GT 1010. This results in 224.4 GB/s versus 48.06 GB/s of bandwidth — a 4.7x difference. The GTX 970 requires a dual-slot cooler and 2x 6-pin power connectors with a 300 W suggested PSU, while the GT 1010 is a single-slot card with no power connectors and a 200 W suggested PSU. The GTX 970 measures 267 mm long, 111 mm high, and 40 mm wide; the GT 1010 is just 147 mm long with no listed height or width. Display outputs also differ, with the GTX 970 offering 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.2, while the GT 1010 has 1x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 2.0.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is a study in NVIDIA’s evolution across two distinct generations. The GTX 970 is built on Maxwell 2.0, the architecture that powered the GeForce 900 series, and its GM204 chip is a mature design optimized for high-throughput gaming workloads. Maxwell 2.0 introduced significant improvements in geometry processing and color compression over its predecessor, which is reflected in the GTX 970’s strong texture and pixel rates. The GT 1010, by contrast, uses the Pascal architecture with the GP108 chip, which is a stripped-down entry-level implementation of the same architecture found in the GeForce 10 series. Pascal brought simultaneous multi-projection and improved asynchronous compute, but the GT 1010’s tiny 74 mm² die and 1,800 million transistors mean it lacks the execution resources to exploit those architectural advantages in any meaningful way.

The process node difference is stark: the GTX 970 is fabricated on TSMC’s 28 nm process, while the GT 1010 uses Samsung’s 14 nm process. This allows the GT 1010 to achieve a higher transistor density (24.3M / mm² versus 13.1M / mm²), but the GTX 970’s much larger die and transistor budget give it an insurmountable lead in raw compute. Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API-level feature parity exists. Neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores, which is expected for their respective price and performance tiers.

The bus interface also differs: the GTX 970 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the GT 1010 is limited to PCIe 3.0 x4. This reduces the GT 1010’s available bandwidth to the host system, which further hampers its ability to feed its relatively small shading array. The GTX 970’s release date of September 2014 and the GT 1010’s January 2021 release date place them on opposite ends of NVIDIA’s GeForce 900 and GeForce 10 product cycles, with the GT 1010 serving as a late-cycle budget part rather than a direct successor — its predecessor is listed as GeForce 900, while the GTX 970’s successor is GeForce 10, creating a cross-generational twist where the older card technically precedes the newer one in the product hierarchy.