NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The head-to-head data paints a strikingly one-sided picture, with the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER taking 9 of the 10 recorded benchmark comparisons. The older Ada Lovelace card dominates across nearly every workload category, from DirectX 9 legacy tests through DirectX 12 Ultimate and compute-heavy tasks. Its only loss comes in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RTX 5060 posts a significant 113321 score against 53683, a 52.6% advantage that suggests the Blackwell architecture has a particular strength in that specific API path.

Looking at the use-case split, the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is the clear choice for anyone prioritizing raw rasterization performance. Its PassMark G3D score of 31811 versus 20891 represents a 52.3% lead, which translates directly to higher frame rates in conventional gaming scenarios. The compute workloads also favor the older card decisively: PassMark GPU Compute shows 18372 versus 10899, a 68.6% gap that matters for content creation, rendering, and any GPU-accelerated productivity tasks.

The RTX 5060's single victory in Vulkan is notable but narrow in scope. That benchmark result indicates the newer architecture handles Vulkan's command buffer and descriptor set management more efficiently, which could matter for Vulkan-based game engines and certain emulation workloads. However, the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, which represents modern DirectX 12 gaming, shows the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER winning by 53.5% (5569 versus 3628), suggesting that the Vulkan advantage does not translate to the broader gaming landscape.

For legacy DirectX compatibility, the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER wins across every generation. The PassMark DirectX 9 test shows 360 versus 225 (60% ahead), DirectX 10 shows 181 versus 127 (42.5% ahead), DirectX 11 shows 278 versus 200 (39% ahead), and DirectX 12 shows 119 versus 77 (54.5% ahead). This consistency across API generations indicates the older card simply has more raw hardware resources to draw upon, regardless of the software interface.

The RTX 5060's smaller footprint and lower power requirements suggest it is designed for a different class of system, but the benchmark data does not show any compensatory performance advantage outside of that single Vulkan result.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent distinct architectural generations from NVIDIA. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER uses the AD103 chip built on Ada Lovelace architecture, while the RTX 5060 uses the GB206 chip on Blackwell 2.0. Both are fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process node, and their transistor densities are nearly identical at 121.1M per mm² versus 121.0M per mm². However, the physical differences are substantial.

The AD103 die measures 379 mm² and contains 45,900 million transistors, while the GB206 die is far smaller at 181 mm² with 21,900 million transistors. This means the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER has more than double the transistor count and roughly double the die area, which explains its much larger physical footprint: 310 mm in length versus 241 mm, 140 mm in height versus 111 mm, and 61 mm in width versus 40 mm. The card is also triple-slot compared to the RTX 5060's dual-slot design.

The compute resources differ dramatically. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER has 8448 shading units, 264 texture mapping units, and 96 raster operation units. The RTX 5060 has 3840 shading units, 120 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, exactly half in each category. Ray tracing cores follow the same pattern: 66 versus 30, and tensor cores are 264 versus 120. These halved resources directly explain the performance gaps seen in the benchmarks.

Memory configuration is another major differentiator. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER uses 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, delivering 672.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 5060 uses 8 GB of GDDR7 on a 128-bit bus, providing 448.0 GB/s. The newer GDDR7 memory runs at a higher effective speed of 28 Gbps versus 21 Gbps, but the narrower bus limits total bandwidth. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER also has a higher base clock at 2340 MHz versus 2280 MHz, and a higher boost clock at 2610 MHz versus 2497 MHz.

The power profiles reflect the resource disparity. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER has a 285 W TDP and requires a 600 W suggested PSU with a 16-pin connector, while the RTX 5060 has a 145 W TDP, a 300 W suggested PSU, and a standard 8-pin connector. The RTX 5060 does support PCIe 5.0 x8, while the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER uses PCIe 4.0 x16, a forward-looking interface choice for the newer card.

Display outputs also differ: the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER offers HDMI 2.1 with three DisplayPort 1.4a connections, while the RTX 5060 offers HDMI 2.1b with three DisplayPort 2.1b connections, supporting newer display standards.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single victory for the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER comes in Geekbench OpenCL, where it scores 199267 against 112787, a 76.7% advantage. This test exercises general-purpose GPU compute through the OpenCL framework, and the result aligns with the card having more than double the shading units and FP32 throughput: 44.10 TFLOPS versus 19.18 TFLOPS.

PassMark GPU Compute shows the second-largest gap at 68.6% (18372 versus 10899), reinforcing the compute advantage. The DirectX 9 test shows a 60% lead (360 versus 225), and the DirectX 12 test shows 54.5% (119 versus 77). The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark, which represents modern gaming loads, shows 5569 versus 3628, a 53.5% lead for the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER.

The PassMark G3D test, which aggregates DirectX performance across multiple versions, shows 31811 versus 20891, a 52.3% difference. The DirectX 10 test shows 181 versus 127 (42.5%), and DirectX 11 shows 278 versus 200 (39%). Even the 2D performance test favors the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER, albeit narrowly: 1225 versus 1154, a 6.2% margin.

The RTX 5060's Vulkan victory is the outlier. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 113321 against 53683, winning by 52.6%. This is a dramatic reversal from the OpenCL result, where the same card loses by 76.7%. The Vulkan score suggests the Blackwell architecture has a significantly more efficient Vulkan driver stack or hardware scheduler, even with half the compute resources.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is the superior performer in nearly every measured category. With an average benchmark score of 31087 compared to 26331 for the RTX 5060, and a 76th percentile versus 72nd percentile among all GPUs, the older card sits in a higher performance tier. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA TITAN RTX at 31676 (1.9% higher) and the RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell at 31532 (1.4% higher), placing it in respectable company. The RTX 5060's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT at 26011 (1.2% lower) and the RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary at 26553 (0.8% higher), indicating it competes in a lower performance band.

For gaming, content creation, and compute workloads, the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is the clear choice based on benchmark results. Its 16 GB memory capacity and 672.3 GB/s bandwidth provide headroom for high-resolution textures and large datasets. The RTX 5060 is the better option only in specific Vulkan-based scenarios, where its 113321 score demonstrates a genuine architectural advantage. It also offers the practical benefits of a smaller dual-slot design, lower 145 W TDP, and PCIe 5.0 support, making it suitable for compact or power-conscious builds.

The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is end-of-life while the RTX 5060 is active production. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER carries a launch MSRP of 799 USD. The RTX 5060 carries a launch MSRP of 299 USD. Users prioritizing maximum performance should select the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER; those prioritizing efficiency, size, and Vulkan performance should consider the RTX 5060.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in DirectX 12 gaming workloads?

A: The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER wins the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test with 5569 points versus 3628 points, a 53.5% advantage. It also leads the PassMark DirectX 12 test by 54.5% (119 versus 77).

Q: Does the RTX 5060 win any benchmarks against the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER?

A: Yes, the RTX 5060 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with 113321 points versus 53683 points for the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER, a 52.6% margin. This is the only benchmark among the ten recorded where the newer card comes out ahead.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER has 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus with 672.3 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 5060 has 8 GB of GDDR7 on a 128-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth. The newer GDDR7 memory runs at 28 Gbps effective versus 21 Gbps for GDDR6X.

Q: What is the compute performance difference?

A: The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER delivers 44.10 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16, while the RTX 5060 delivers 19.18 TFLOPS for both. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER leads by 76.7% (199267 versus 112787), and in PassMark GPU Compute it leads by 68.6% (18372 versus 10899).

Q: Which card has more shading units and ray tracing cores?

A: The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER has 8448 shading units and 66 RT cores, while the RTX 5060 has 3840 shading units and 30 RT cores. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER also has 264 tensor cores versus 120 for the RTX 5060.

Q: How do the power requirements compare?

A: The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER has a 285 W TDP with a 600 W suggested PSU and a 16-pin connector. The RTX 5060 has a 145 W TDP with a 300 W suggested PSU and a standard 8-pin connector. The RTX 5060 is also dual-slot while the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is triple-slot.

Specification Differences

| Specification | RTX 4070 Ti SUPER | RTX 5060 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Chip | AD103 | GB206 |

| Transistors | 45,900 million | 21,900 million |

| Die Size | 379 mm² | 181 mm² |

| Base Clock | 2340 MHz | 2280 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2610 MHz | 2497 MHz |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6X | GDDR7 |

| Memory Bus | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 672.3 GB/s | 448.0 GB/s |

| Memory Speed | 21 Gbps effective | 28 Gbps effective |

| Shading Units | 8448 | 3840 |

| TMUs | 264 | 120 |

| ROPs | 96 | 48 |

| RT Cores | 66 | 30 |

| Tensor Cores | 264 | 120 |

| Pixel Rate | 250.6 GPixel/s | 119.9 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 689.0 GTexel/s | 299.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 / FP16 | 44.10 TFLOPS | 19.18 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 285 W | 145 W |

| Slot Width | Triple-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 16-pin | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DP 1.4a | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DP 2.1b |

| Dimensions | 310 x 140 x 61 mm | 241 x 111 x 40 mm |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Launch MSRP | 799 USD | 299 USD |