NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU shows a higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti records an average benchmark score of 44795, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER records 3075. The RTX 4070 Ti also holds an 84th percentile ranking among all GPUs, whereas the RTX 5080 SUPER sits at the 19th percentile.

Q: What is the difference in video memory capacity between the two cards?

A: The RTX 4070 Ti has 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 5080 SUPER has 24 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 1.02 TB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The RTX 5080 SUPER reaches 56.28 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, compared to 40.09 TFLOPS for the RTX 4070 Ti. Both cards maintain a 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio.

Q: How do the two compare in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test?

A: The RTX 4070 Ti scores 5024, which is 63.4% higher than the RTX 5080 SUPER's score of 3075. The RTX 4070 Ti wins this specific head-to-head benchmark.

Q: What are the transistor counts and die sizes for each GPU?

A: The RTX 4070 Ti uses 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, while the RTX 5080 SUPER uses 45,600 million transistors on a 378 mm² die. Transistor densities are similar at 121.8M per mm² and 120.6M per mm², respectively.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The RTX 5080 SUPER boosts to 2617 MHz, marginally ahead of the RTX 4070 Ti's 2610 MHz. The base clocks are 2295 MHz for the RTX 5080 SUPER and 2310 MHz for the RTX 4070 Ti.

Architecture Differences

The RTX 4070 Ti belongs to the GeForce 40-series, built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD104 chip. The RTX 5080 SUPER belongs to the GeForce 50-series, built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with the GB203 chip. Both are manufactured by TSMC on a 5 nm process node, but the newer Blackwell design integrates more hardware: 45,600 million transistors versus 35,800 million, on a larger die of 378 mm² compared to 294 mm². Transistor density is nearly identical, with the Ada chip at 121.8M per mm² and the Blackwell chip at 120.6M per mm², indicating that the scale increase comes from die size rather than packing efficiency.

The Blackwell 2.0 architecture brings a substantial increase in execution resources. The RTX 5080 SUPER has 10,752 shading units, 336 texture mapping units, and 112 raster operations pipelines, while the RTX 4070 Ti has 7,680 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. Ray tracing hardware also scales up: 84 RT cores on the RTX 5080 SUPER versus 60 on the RTX 4070 Ti. Tensor core counts follow the same pattern, with 336 on the newer card and 240 on the older one. These differences translate directly into higher theoretical throughput for the RTX 5080 SUPER in pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 compute.

Memory architecture diverges more sharply. The RTX 4070 Ti uses GDDR6X with a 192-bit interface, while the RTX 5080 SUPER uses GDDR7 with a 256-bit interface. The newer card doubles capacity to 24 GB and more than doubles bandwidth to 1.02 TB/s from 504.2 GB/s. Interface connectivity also advances: the RTX 4070 Ti runs on PCIe 4.0 x16, while the RTX 5080 SUPER uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs change as well, with the RTX 4070 Ti offering 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the RTX 5080 SUPER offers 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b. Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The power delivery design is similar in topology, both using a dual-slot form factor and a single 16-pin connector, but the RTX 5080 SUPER's TDP is 415 W versus 285 W for the RTX 4070 Ti.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a single direct comparison between these two GPUs: the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. In this workload, the RTX 4070 Ti scores 5024, while the RTX 5080 SUPER scores 3075. The delta is 63.4% in favor of the RTX 4070 Ti. This is a decisive margin, placing the older card well ahead of the newer one in this specific synthetic DirectX 12 scenario.

The RTX 5080 SUPER's score of 3075 places it at the 19th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro P1000 at 3163 (2.8% higher), the Intel Arc Pro B60 at 3182 (3.4% higher), and lower-scoring entries like the NVIDIA GeForce 820A at 2983 (3.1% lower) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M at 2967 (3.6% lower). The RTX 4070 Ti, by contrast, sits at the 84th percentile, with an average score of 44795 across all recorded benchmarks. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile at 45152 (0.8% lower), the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT at 45384 (1.3% lower), and the Intel Arc A730M at 45592 (1.7% lower), with the NVIDIA RTX A6000 at 44075 scoring 1.6% lower.

Broader benchmark data for the RTX 4070 Ti shows strong performance across multiple APIs. In Geekbench Vulkan it records 213808, and in Geekbench OpenCL it records 176953. PassMark results include a G3D score of 31624, a GPU compute score of 18396, a G2D score of 1200, and DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 scores of 352, 187, 288, and 116, respectively. The RTX 5080 SUPER has only the single Steel Nomad result recorded in the database, so no cross-API comparison is possible. The available data shows a clear win for the RTX 4070 Ti in the one shared workload, but the RTX 5080 SUPER's architectural specifications indicate substantially higher theoretical throughput.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification category. Process node and foundry are identical: both use 5 nm TSMC. Transistor counts differ, with the RTX 5080 SUPER at 45,600 million versus 35,800 million for the RTX 4070 Ti, and die size differs at 378 mm² versus 294 mm². Transistor density is close, 120.6M per mm² versus 121.8M per mm². Clock speeds are similar: base clocks are 2295 MHz for the RTX 5080 SUPER and 2310 MHz for the RTX 4070 Ti, while boost clocks are 2617 MHz and 2610 MHz, respectively. Memory clocks differ significantly, with the RTX 5080 SUPER at 2000 MHz (32 Gbps effective) versus 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective) for the RTX 4070 Ti.

Memory capacity, type, bus width, and bandwidth all favor the RTX 5080 SUPER: 24 GB GDDR7 on a 256-bit bus with 1.02 TB/s, versus 12 GB GDDR6X on a 192-bit bus with 504.2 GB/s. Shading units, TMUs, and ROPs are higher on the RTX 5080 SUPER: 10,752 versus 7,680, 336 versus 240, and 112 versus 80. RT cores and tensor cores also increase: 84 versus 60, and 336 versus 240. Pixel rate is 293.1 GPixel/s versus 208.8 GPixel/s, texture rate is 879.3 GTexel/s versus 626.4 GTexel/s, and FP32 is 56.28 TFLOPS versus 40.09 TFLOPS. TDP is 415 W versus 285 W. The bus interface advances from PCIe 4.0 x16 to PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs change from HDMI 2.1 with DisplayPort 1.4a to HDMI 2.1b with DisplayPort 2.1b. Physical dimensions differ: the RTX 5080 SUPER is longer at 304 mm versus 285 mm, taller at 137 mm versus 112 mm, and slightly thinner at 40 mm versus 42 mm. Production status differs, with the RTX 4070 Ti marked end-of-life and the RTX 5080 SUPER active. The launch MSRP is 799 USD for the RTX 4070 Ti and 999 USD for the RTX 5080 SUPER.

The Verdict

The recorded data presents a contradiction between architectural specifications and benchmark results. On paper, the RTX 5080 SUPER is the more powerful GPU: it has more transistors, more shading units, more RT and tensor cores, double the memory capacity, and nearly double the memory bandwidth. Its FP32 throughput of 56.28 TFLOPS is about 40% higher than the RTX 4070 Ti's 40.09 TFLOPS. Pixel rate and texture rate also favor the newer card by similar margins.

However, the only head-to-head benchmark in the database, 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, shows the RTX 4070 Ti winning decisively with a score of 5024 versus 3075, a 63.4% advantage. The RTX 5080 SUPER's percentile ranking of 19 places it far below the RTX 4070 Ti's 84th percentile. This suggests that the RTX 5080 SUPER's benchmark result may reflect a limited or early dataset, as its single recorded score is far below what its hardware specifications would predict. The RTX 4070 Ti's average benchmark score of 44795 across ten tests provides a more robust picture of its performance profile.

For users relying strictly on the recorded measurements, the RTX 4070 Ti is the card that delivers higher observed performance in the shared workload. For users evaluating theoretical capabilities, the RTX 5080 SUPER's specifications point to a higher ceiling in compute-heavy and memory-bound scenarios. The data supports the RTX 4070 Ti as the proven performer in the database, while the RTX 5080 SUPER remains an unproven entity with a single data point.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4070 Ti wins in every recorded benchmark comparison. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score exceeds the RTX 5080 SUPER's by 63.4%. It also wins on the strength of its broader benchmark suite: ten recorded tests spanning DirectX 9 through 12, OpenCL, Vulkan, G2D, G3D, and GPU compute. Its percentile rank of 84 versus 19 indicates that, within the database's population, the RTX 4070 Ti sits far higher in the performance distribution. Its average benchmark score of 44795 dwarfs the RTX 5080 SUPER's 3075.

The RTX 5080 SUPER wins on raw specification counts. It has 32 GB more memory capacity (24 GB versus 12 GB), a wider 256-bit bus, and GDDR7 memory that delivers 1.02 TB/s versus 504.2 GB/s. It has more shading units, more TMUs, more ROPs, more RT cores, and more tensor cores. Its FP32, pixel rate, and texture rate are all higher. It supports PCIe 5.0 and newer display outputs. These advantages would matter in workloads that scale with compute throughput, memory bandwidth, or memory capacity, but the database does not currently contain benchmark results that demonstrate those advantages. The RTX 5080 SUPER also carries a higher TDP of 415 W versus 285 W, suggesting it is designed for a higher power envelope.

The use-case split is therefore clear: the RTX 4070 Ti wins in measured performance and benchmark diversity, making it the safer choice based on recorded data. The RTX 5080 SUPER wins in architectural headroom and memory resources, making it the candidate for future workloads that can exploit its larger compute and bandwidth capabilities, provided its benchmark results improve beyond the single recorded low score.